Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney

catandgirl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 957 posts

Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney

#41

Post by Jasper_ »

rimeice wrote: post #5

The sooner anyone making profit from models trained on creators proprietary content start paying for the content they’re using the better for creators, society and even the AI companies. It’s pretty tiring hearing people argue about whether copyright law applies to AI companies or not. It applies. Just get on and sort out a proper licensing model.

> "The bottom line is this," the firm, known as a16z, wrote. "Imposing the cost of actual or potential copyright liability on the creators of AI models will either kill or significantly hamper their development."

> The firm said payment for all of the copyrighted material already used in LLMs would cost the companies that built them "tens or hundreds of billions of dollars a year in royalty payments."

https://www.businessinsider.com/marc-andreessen-horowitz-ai-...

Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney

#42

Post by Minor49er »

rideontime wrote: post #14
wlesieutre wrote: post #11

On the same topic from another webcomic: https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2024/01/03/terminarter (text commentary below the comic, in case your OS has decided to conceal the scroll bar from you and you didn't notice the page is longer)

This would explain why I find midjourney art so hideous.

I think a better explanation is that the vast majority of users don't try any prompt parameters or different styles and just rely on its default settings

Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney

#43

Post by 0xf00ff00f »

ssgodderidge wrote: post #26

I wonder what effects AI ripping off today's artists will have on the next generation. They will grow up with AI "art" generators. Will they be concerned enough about AI-ripping them off that the don't put out novel, "human-made" works of art? Will they put down the AI tools long enough to learn "manual" forms of art?

Yeah, it's over. Why would a kid want to spend thousands of hours practicing with pencil and paper, when they can get a much more impressive result by typing a couple of words on a web site?

Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney

#44

Post by croes »

ipsum2 wrote: post #20
croes wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making money from the trained model isn't fair use anymore.

No, fair use does not preclude making money.

If we talk about the OpenAI magnitude of money it's definitely precluded, that's way beyond fair.

Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney

#45

Post by dtrailin »

spookie wrote: post #25
andy99 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair use. Licenses like that are enforced under copyright, if the use is not subject to copyright, the license terms are irrelevant.

I'm not sure if it applies here. Midjourney's use intends to substitute the artists' work, and is commercial.

Unless it's a 1 for 1 replica I don't see how it's a substitute in the copyright sense.

Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney

#46

Post by rideontime »

Minor49er wrote: post #42
rideontime wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would explain why I find midjourney art so hideous.

I think a better explanation is that the vast majority of users don't try any prompt parameters or different styles and just rely on its default settings

Sorry, this was a joke about the decline of "Gabe's" artistic output. I'd find midjourney's output repulsive no matter what it looked like.

Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney

#47

Post by CharlesW »

ineptech wrote: post #32
wlesieutre wrote: post #11

On the same topic from another webcomic: https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2024/01/03/terminarter (text commentary below the comic, in case your OS has decided to conceal the scroll bar from you and you didn't notice the page is longer)

> I'm always reticent to fully engage in "The Dialogue," regardless of its momentary configuration. It's a smoothie made from shibboleths; you have to be able to detect them at only a few parts per million because once these things metastasize, they stop being about whatever they were about and instead become increasingly loud recitations of various catechisms and loyalty oaths. Boy does that ring true.

Yes, the entire post (it's short) is well worth a read.

Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney

#48

Post by andybak »

croes wrote: post #23
artninja1988 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair use, if it does indeed apply, doesn't care about license

I doubt it's still fair use if you become one of most valuable companies, hence the word "fair" in fair use.

It's a specific legal term - so the everyday meaning of the words isn't relevant as far as I understand it.

Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney

#49

Post by aldousd666 »

I still don't get it. Why are they upset? Nothing has been taken from them. There is no alternative in midjourney that sates anyone's desire to read their comic. Just as many people are going to visit the page for the comic, if not more. Why are they complaining?
Post reply on HN