Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training • Hacker News Board

Re: Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training

#311

Post by realusername » Thu, Jun 01, 2023, 9:16 AM UTC

Mordisquitos wrote: post #295

inkblotuniverse wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I read a lot of fantasy books as a kid, then start writing my own fantasy book, should I have to pay royalties to the authors of the books I read?

Does your ability to write fantasy books absolutely depend on having read those fantasy books as a kid? Was gaining the ability to write your own fantasy books and profit from them your only motivation to read those fantasy books? After gaining the ability to write fantasy books thanks to having read them, can you now produce fantasy books at a qualitatively different speed, scale, and conditions than any of the auth…

> If the answer to those three questions is "yes", then I would argue that yes, you absolutely should have to pay royalties to the authors.

Copyright lobbies can't have their own cake and eat it too, if you want to enforce such a different way of thinking about copyright compared to the current one, that would destroy the current industry and rightly so.

Re: Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training

#312

Post by Aachen » Thu, Jun 01, 2023, 9:26 AM UTC

walthamstow wrote: post #310

nologic01 wrote: post #286

This article is an example of emerging AI-bro tactics that completely mirrors crypto-bro tactics: they pick any piece of news and reinterpret it to fit an agenda. While the article is in English, the link to source is in Japanese. The only external source I found suggests the discussion is about promoting open data and open science from research institutions [1] [1] https://asianews.network/japan-to-promote-use-of-ge…

Not just crypto bros, this kind of thing is rife in politics too. Brexit is full of it. People pick one article about one minor thing in one niche area of the economy and use it to 'prove' their entire agenda.

Not just politics. I remember this being a realisation as a teenager, noticing that if you bring five reasons, the person you're talking to will refute a random one in a funny way and now the audience will decide you were wrong.

Danny was the person who was absolutely the best at this. I should have written one of them down, as I can't even reproduce it but he'd use some logical fallacy to make his case which is, for me at least, super hard to then have to dive into "but that's not how the universe works" without having a 20 minute discussion about life and losing the audience plus the person I'm talking to. Meanwhile, what he said was funny as hell.

Sure, anyone who understood the situation would understand this isn't a good reason, but you had to think about it (at least a little) before realising that. The "owww" moment removed any thinking brain cells from the audience. It was more impressive than frustrating to be honest, even being on the losing side every time.

These days, politics and PR frustrate me because the tactics are no longer among 16 year old classmates but about things that actually matter. The methods haven't changed, only the importance of the argument.

Re: Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training

#313

Post by hutzlibu » Thu, Jun 01, 2023, 9:27 AM UTC

walthamstow wrote: post #310

nologic01 wrote: post #286

This article is an example of emerging AI-bro tactics that completely mirrors crypto-bro tactics: they pick any piece of news and reinterpret it to fit an agenda. While the article is in English, the link to source is in Japanese. The only external source I found suggests the discussion is about promoting open data and open science from research institutions [1] [1] https://asianews.network/japan-to-promote-use-of-ge…

Not just crypto bros, this kind of thing is rife in politics too. Brexit is full of it. People pick one article about one minor thing in one niche area of the economy and use it to 'prove' their entire agenda.

And before politics we had religion. This persons house, who disagrees about the right dogma X was struck by lightning, see this proofs he disobeyed (the) god(s). And X is the law.

(ignoring the other people also struck by the lightning, or those who did not got hit)

Re: Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training

#314

Post by lmm » Thu, Jun 01, 2023, 9:30 AM UTC

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #304

lmm wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drawing a copy of a copyrighted picture from memory, and then distributing that copy, would certainly normally be copyright infringement. (A logo may not be enough of a creative work to be copyrightable, but I assume that's not what you're getting at).

> Drawing a copy of a copyrighted picture from memory, and then distributing that copy, would certainly normally be copyright infringement. In US law, there is a nuance between Copyright and Trademark. > Drawing a copy of a copyrighted picture from memory, and then distributing that copy Would not necessarily be copyright infringement (it depends on a judge). For example, why Taylor Swift is able to re-record her mus…

> In US law, there is a nuance between Copyright and Trademark.

It's not a nuance, it's a completely separate legal regime, and not what this conversation is about.

> Would not necessarily be copyright infringement (it depends on a judge).

Every law can be challenged in court, but a copy of a picture as-is is a pretty clear-cut case.

> For example, why Taylor Swift is able to re-record her music (the copyright is owned by a recording studio), as is, and can distribute the new version as "Taylor's Version" because she owns the copyright on the new version.

Nope. She's able to because there is a compulsory license for covers of songs that have already been published - something very different from them not being protected by copyright - and/or because she owns some of the rights. She may well be paying royalties on them. That compulsory license regime is specific to recorded music and does not apply to pictures.

> A logo is actually MORE protectable, through Trademark. Trademark is significantly MORE protected than Copyright.

"More" is a simplification; trademark laws are quite different from copyright laws, stronger in some ways and weaker in others (e.g. you can lose a trademark by not enforcing it, whereas you cannot lose a copyright that way). In any case, that's a distraction from the current topic.

Re: Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training

#315

Post by jprete » Thu, Jun 01, 2023, 9:30 AM UTC

michaelbrave wrote: post #233

madeofpalk wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A human can see a advertisement for a Marvel movie and then reproduce the Marvel logo. Redistributing (and possibly actually doing that reproduction) that logo is a copyright violation, but the learning process isn't. This then becomes about where the liability of that violation lies, and how attractive that is to companies. A human "learning" the marvel logo and reproducing it is violation. How does OpenAPI fit in…

> A human "learning" the marvel logo and reproducing it is violation Not quite, it's really in the resale or redistribution that violation occurs, painting an image of the hulk to hang in your living room wouldn't really be a violation, selling that painting could be, turning it into merch and selling that would wholeheartedly be, trying to pass it off as official merch is without question a violation.

Hanging it in your living room is in fact a copyright violation, just not one that Marvel is likely to legally pursue.

Re: Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training

#316

Post by rowanG077 » Thu, Jun 01, 2023, 9:31 AM UTC

Aachen wrote: post #312

walthamstow wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just crypto bros, this kind of thing is rife in politics too. Brexit is full of it. People pick one article about one minor thing in one niche area of the economy and use it to 'prove' their entire agenda.

Not just politics. I remember this being a realisation as a teenager, noticing that if you bring five reasons, the person you're talking to will refute a random one in a funny way and now the audience will decide you were wrong. Danny was the person who was absolutely the best at this. I should have written one of them down, as I can't even reproduce it but he'd use some logical fallacy to make his case which is, for…

Yes. That's why debating is almost entirely about how charismatic you are and your debate skills rather then whether your point has merit. There is a good reason science types are generally considered bad debaters. Even though their points mostly align with reality.

Re: Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training

#317

Post by jprete » Thu, Jun 01, 2023, 9:33 AM UTC

Paradigma11 wrote: post #180

madeofpalk wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you be certain that the content being generated is non-infringing?

The same way you do with any other content you generate in other ways.

Normally when I generate content it’s from my brain and I can tell the difference between copying memorized content, re-expressing memorized content, and generating something original. How do I know what the LLM is doing?

Re: Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training

#318

Post by nologic01 » Thu, Jun 01, 2023, 9:35 AM UTC

walthamstow wrote: post #310

nologic01 wrote: post #286

This article is an example of emerging AI-bro tactics that completely mirrors crypto-bro tactics: they pick any piece of news and reinterpret it to fit an agenda. While the article is in English, the link to source is in Japanese. The only external source I found suggests the discussion is about promoting open data and open science from research institutions [1] [1] https://asianews.network/japan-to-promote-use-of-ge…

Not just crypto bros, this kind of thing is rife in politics too. Brexit is full of it. People pick one article about one minor thing in one niche area of the economy and use it to 'prove' their entire agenda.

Conflicting political or economic agendas and strategies to promote them are of-course the bread and butter of humanity.

But we grossly under-estimated how out-of-control this game will become when transposed into the unified digital space comprising social media, blogs and online news outlets (the so-called echo-chamber), combined with invasive data mining techniques of online behavior, sentiment analysis, click farms and now, drum roll... infinite amounts of LLM generated junk.

It is remarkable that people don't appreciate how broken the design that supposedly signifies "modernity" and opportunity.

Re: Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training

#319

Post by Aachen » Thu, Jun 01, 2023, 9:43 AM UTC

jasrys wrote: post #184

I testified to the US Copyright Office this morning on AI in their roundtable session on AI and music[1]. A good portion of the focus of this panel was on whether copyrighted inputs (in this case, sound recordings and musical compositions) being fed into AI models for training purposes could plausibly constitute a fair use under existing US copyright law. Some of the comments here are missing the context of the recen…

> transformativeness is not dispositive in and of itself in the context of a fair use defense

Could you dumb this sentence down for me?

I would guess it means that making a derived work, changing the original, makes no difference in whether reproducing the work (in altered form) is fair use.

But that sounds well-established, I can't imagine that movies would suddenly be legal to distribute if you just distribute the file backwards (people can then reverse it again to watch it), whether or not you claim that the distribution is fair use or not copyrighted to begin with or whatever. Probably that's not what this court had to decide and I'm misunderstanding something?

Re: Japan’s government will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training

#320

Post by testermelon » Thu, Jun 01, 2023, 9:45 AM UTC

Aachen wrote: post #312

walthamstow wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just crypto bros, this kind of thing is rife in politics too. Brexit is full of it. People pick one article about one minor thing in one niche area of the economy and use it to 'prove' their entire agenda.

Not just politics. I remember this being a realisation as a teenager, noticing that if you bring five reasons, the person you're talking to will refute a random one in a funny way and now the audience will decide you were wrong. Danny was the person who was absolutely the best at this. I should have written one of them down, as I can't even reproduce it but he'd use some logical fallacy to make his case which is, for…

In short, for most people HOW you say it is far more important than WHAT you’re saying.