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

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

technomancers.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–426 of 426 posts

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

#421

Post by lmm »

teddyh wrote: post #410
lmm wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The differences don't seem salient though. Doing a legal thing faster doesn't generally make it any less legal; doing it for profit changes the legal regime somewhat but not in ways that seem relevant to what's being claimed.

> Doing a legal thing faster doesn't generally make it any less legal “But officer, it is legal to drive just slightly slower than I was going!” Simply put: You are wrong. The law makes arbitrary distinctions all the time , for practical reasons.

There is a specific law against driving above a certain speed. There's no law like that against being an AI.

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

#422

Post by hivesteel »

Good discussions in this thread but don't extrapolate into Japanese culture and law too much.

The only source on this is from this guy's blog, summarizing what they talked about at a committee meeting. This guy is 1 of 465 members in the Japanese house of representative. He is commenting that model training is basically data analysis which is not protected by current copyright law. Note he is not a lawyer nor a powerful law maker. He also acknowledges new laws are necessary for emerging generative AI and this is basically not covered by current law.

There is no news in Japan about this, because these are inconsequential discussions between members of an oversight committee handling (afaik) budgetary concerns.

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

#423

Post by dbspin »

HPsquared wrote: post #354
dbspin wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can make private works if you want to keep control of them, but at some point the public deserves to share and rework the things that have been pushed into the public consciousness. There's already a licensing framework for artists doing this - should they wish to. It's called Creative Commons, and allows a pretty fine distinction of rights from public domain to free for personal use not commercial, and everyth…

What if the AI is open source and run by individual creators? That changes the slant of the argument a lot. I worry that excessive regulation will mostly come down on individual creators using AI tools.

I'm not sure what you mean? The image and text models currently becoming popular are being trained on work that is not owned or created by those creating the models. The consensus amongst the artists whose work is being used to train them (without their permission or compensation) is very high that this is a bad thing. Financial impacts are already being felt by artists across industries. There's a huge level of denial of the impact of this on professional artists, already today, here on hacker news. 'Open source' is a separate issue to training on other peoples work, replicating their style and stealing their livelihood.

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

#424

Post by realusername »

Mordisquitos wrote: post #389
realusername wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I would appreciate if you addressed the questions as literally stated. I could just as well argue that businesses developing or making use of LLMs can't have their cake and eat it too. If they want their computer programs to enjoy the same rights and prerogatives as human creators do, they should be ready to demonstrate that those models are truly moral agents, with their own lived experiences, and thus deserve the s…

> If they want their computer programs to enjoy the same rights and prerogatives as human creators do

I don't think they care about that, they seems fine with output images not being copyrightable as per the current legislation.

Post reply on HN