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

An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

theaiunderwriter.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 927 posts

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#531

Post by saaaaaam »

rdtsc wrote: post #127
littlecranky67 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I can hire an artist and ask him to draw me a picture of Indiana Jones, he creates a perfect copy and I hang it on my fridge. Where did I (or the artist) violate any copyright (or other) laws? It is the artist that is replaced by the AI, not the copyrighted IP.

> But I can hire an artist and ask him to draw me a picture of Indiana Jones, Sure, assuming the artist has the proper license and franchise rights to make and distribute copies. You can go buy a picture of Indy today that may not be printed by Walt Disney Studios but by some other outfit or artists. Or, you mean if the artist doesn't have a license to produce and distribute Indiana Jones images? Well they'll be in t…

The likeness of Indiana Jones is not protected in any way - as far as I know - that would stop a human artist creating, rendering and selling a work of art representing their creative vision of Indiana Jones. And even more so in a private context. Even if the likeness is protected (“archaeologist, adventurer, whip, hat”) then this protection would only be in certain jurisdictions and that protection is more akin to a design right where the likeness would need to be articulated AND registered. Many jurisdictions don’t require copyright registration and do not offer that sort of technical likeness registration.

If they traced a photo they might be violating the copyright of the photographer.

But if they are drawing an archaeologist adventurer with a whip and a hat based on their consumption and memory of Indiana Jones imagery there is very little anyone could do.

If that image was then printed on an industrial scale or printed onto t-shirt there is a (albeit somewhat theoretical) chance that in some jurisdictions sale of those products may be able to be restricted based on rights to the likeness. But that would be a stretch.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#532

Post by exodust »

asadotzler wrote: post #278
Kim_Bruning wrote: post #213

Here's a question. What if I want to prompt: "An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip, make sure it is NOT Indiana Jones." One way or another, you (and the model) do need to know who Indiana Jones is. After that, the moral and legal choices of whether to generate the image, and what to do with it, are all yours. And we might not agree on what that is, but you do get the choice

If the AI company sells it to you, no matter your prompting, they are stealing. If you also sell that work, then so are you.

They are not stealing! Indiana Jones is already out there in pop culture.

We shouldn't complain about AI holding a mirror up to our world and noting "you guys love Indiana Jones a lot. Here's a picture inspired by his appearance, based on your generic prompt that I'm guessing is a nod to the franchise."

The AI is a step ahead of your unsubtle attempts to "catch it stealing".

The image of Indiana Jones is not "ready for market" when it emerges from your prompt. Just like Googling "Indy with whip", the images that emerge are not a commercial opportunity for you.

When you make multi-billion dollar movies with iconic characters, expect AI to know what they look like and send them your way if your prompt is painfully obvious in its intent.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#533

Post by badmintonbaseba »

card_zero wrote: post #354
dcow wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and notably the source recipe can’t be copyrighted. Trade secrets and recipes are not copyrightable. That’s the point. We have entire vastly profitable industries built around protection of trade secrets, with no copyright in play. Competing to make make the best cola flavored beverage or the best burrito is a thing . Competing to make the best rendition of Snow White, is not . What’s the rub? They don’t seem th…

Snow White is not the best example, there are non-Disney versions, like the one with Sigourney Weaver and the one with Chris Hemsworth.

It's a good example of what happens when a copyright is expired.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#534

Post by ionwake »

Not sure if anyone is interested in this story, but I remember at the height of the PokemonGo craze I noticed there were no shirts for the different factions in the game, cant rememebr what they were called but something like Teamread or something. I setup an online shop to just to sell a red shirt with the word on it. The next day my whole shop was taken offline for potential copyright infringement.

What I found surprising is I didnt even have one sale. Somehow someone had notified Nintendo AND my shop had been taken down, to sell merch that didn't even exist for the market and if I remember correctly - also it didnt even have any imagery on it or anything trademarkable - even if it was clearly meant for pokmeonGo fans.

Im not bitter I just found it interesting how quick and ruthless they were. Like bros I didn't even get a chance to make a sale. ( yes and also I dont think I infringed anything).

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#535

Post by jpc0 »

djoldman wrote: post #332

I don't condone or endorse breaking any laws. That said, trademark laws like life of the author + 95 years are absolutely absurd. The ONLY reason to have any law prohibiting unlicensed copying of intangible property is to incentivize the creation of intangible property. The reasoning being that if you don't allow people to exclude 3rd party copying, then the primary party will assumedly not receive compensation for t…

You are missing a bunch of edge cases, and the law is all about edge cases.

An artist who works professionally has family members, family members who are dependent on them.

If they pass young, become popular just before they pass and their extremely popular works are now public domain. Their family sees nothing from their work, that is absolutely being commercialized ( publishing and creation generally spawns two seperate copyrights).

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#536

Post by jpc0 »

pegasus wrote: post #521
jl6 wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are approximately zero people who decide they'll create something if they're protected for 95 years after their death but won't if it's 94 years. I’m sure you’re right for individual authors who are driven by a creative spark, but for, say, movies made by large studios, the length of copyright is directly tied to the value of the movie as an asset. If that asset generates revenue for 120 years, then it’s slig…

Seems to me most of that inflated budget is needed for the entertainment role of films, not the art in them, which a low budget can often stimulate rather than inhibit. In which case nothing of importance would be lost by a drastic shortening of copyright terms.

You are putting a pretty blatant cap on what constitutes "art"...

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#537

Post by jeroenhd »

MgB2 wrote: post #30

Idk, the models generating what are basically 1:1 copies of the training data from pretty generic descriptions feels like a severe case of overfitting to me. What use is a generational model that just regurgitates the input? I feel like the less advanced generations, maybe even because of their limitations in terms of size, were better at coming up with something that at least feels new. In the end, other than for co…

People like what they already know. When they prompt something and get a realistic looking Indiana Jones, they're probably happy about it.

To me, this article is further proof that LLMs are a form of lossy storage. People attribute special quality to the loss (the image isn't wrong, it's just got different "features" that got inserted) but at this point there's not a lot distinguishing a seed+prompt file+model from a lossy archive of media, be it text or images, and in the future likely video as well.

The craziest thing is that AI seems to have gathered some kind of special status that earlier forms of digital reproduction didn't have (even though those 64kbps MP3s from napster were far from perfect reproductions), probably because now it's done by large corporations rather than individuals.

If we're accepting AI-washing of copyright, we might as well accept pirated movies, as those are re-encoded from original high-resolution originals as well.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#538

Post by benwad »

jl6 wrote: post #508
djoldman wrote: post #332

I don't condone or endorse breaking any laws. That said, trademark laws like life of the author + 95 years are absolutely absurd. The ONLY reason to have any law prohibiting unlicensed copying of intangible property is to incentivize the creation of intangible property. The reasoning being that if you don't allow people to exclude 3rd party copying, then the primary party will assumedly not receive compensation for t…

> There are approximately zero people who decide they'll create something if they're protected for 95 years after their death but won't if it's 94 years. I’m sure you’re right for individual authors who are driven by a creative spark, but for, say, movies made by large studios, the length of copyright is directly tied to the value of the movie as an asset. If that asset generates revenue for 120 years, then it’s slig…

The Fellowship of the Ring, the first of Peter Jackson's LOTR movies released in 2001, made $887 million in its original theatrical run (on a $93 million budget). It would absolutely still have been made if copyright was only 20 years. And now it would be in the public domain!

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#539

Post by _t9ow »

shermantanktop wrote: post #12
CamperBob2 wrote: post #2

And? What's the model supposed to do? It's just doing what many human artists would do, if they're not explicitly being paid to create new IP. If infringement is happening, it arguably doesn't happen when an infringing work product is generated (or regurgitated, or whatever you want to call it.) Much less when the model is trained. It's when the output is used commercially -- by a human -- that the liability should r…

I agree. But massive changes in scale or leverage can undermine this type of principled stand. One death is a murder; 100k deaths is a war or a pandemic. One piece of chewing gum on the ground will get you a caning in Singapore; when everyone does it, that's NYC. Up until now, one had to have some level of graphical or artistic skills to do this, but not anymore. Again, I agree that it attaches to the human...but we…

> One piece of chewing gum on the ground will get you a caning in Singapore

This is not true, by the way. You will be fined for littering; or, if you are a repeat offender, be sentenced to cleaning public areas while wearing an offensively bright-coloured uniform (so that everyone can see that you are being punished). Source: https://www.nea.gov.sg/media/news/news/index/nea-increases-v...

But no, you won't be caned for littering. Caning is reserved for more serious offences like vandalism, or much worse crimes like rape and murder.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#540

Post by lukan »

ionwake wrote: post #534

Not sure if anyone is interested in this story, but I remember at the height of the PokemonGo craze I noticed there were no shirts for the different factions in the game, cant rememebr what they were called but something like Teamread or something. I setup an online shop to just to sell a red shirt with the word on it. The next day my whole shop was taken offline for potential copyright infringement. What I found sur…

How was your shop taken down?

Usually there are lawyers letters involved first?

Post reply on HN