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

AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

heathermeeker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 705 posts

Re: AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

#71

Post by CuriouslyC »

phoe-krk wrote: post #31
CuriouslyC wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect. Training images are used to generate a latent manifold which might not contain any of the images in the original training set to within a meaningful delta unless they're massively overrepresented or cliche.

This might be technically correct but doesn't seem to matter much in practice because of how many practical cases of NN outputting copyright-infriging content there are. These include examples in the recent lawsuits that made the rounds on HN. Either even the best specialists behind these NNs cannot make the NNs not contain data that is "massively overrepresented or cliche", or they are unwilling to.

Or they're focusing on performance to get the tools to the place where they're good enough to start being adopted. Once getting sued is more of a problem than not having a product at all, it's not hard to switch gears. I imagine there are a number of ways to avoid storing "too close" copies in a model that have various tradeoffs, I'm sure they'll be adopted quickly in the face of litigation.

Re: AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

#72

Post by CuriouslyC »

danbolt wrote: post #36
CuriouslyC wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect. Training images are used to generate a latent manifold which might not contain any of the images in the original training set to within a meaningful delta unless they're massively overrepresented or cliche.

> to within a meaningful delta This feels like an argument for communism being the most productive system in theory. Most of the time I feel like I see uninspired material that’s tracing it’s own training data.

How is that any different from looking at human art?

Re: AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

#73

Post by fzil »

phoe-krk wrote: post #31
CuriouslyC wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect. Training images are used to generate a latent manifold which might not contain any of the images in the original training set to within a meaningful delta unless they're massively overrepresented or cliche.

This might be technically correct but doesn't seem to matter much in practice because of how many practical cases of NN outputting copyright-infriging content there are. These include examples in the recent lawsuits that made the rounds on HN. Either even the best specialists behind these NNs cannot make the NNs not contain data that is "massively overrepresented or cliche", or they are unwilling to.

> the recent lawsuits that made the rounds on HN

I happened to have missed those discussions, do you have some links you can point towards? thanks!

Re: AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

#74

Post by phoe-krk »

fzil wrote: post #73
phoe-krk wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be technically correct but doesn't seem to matter much in practice because of how many practical cases of NN outputting copyright-infriging content there are. These include examples in the recent lawsuits that made the rounds on HN. Either even the best specialists behind these NNs cannot make the NNs not contain data that is "massively overrepresented or cliche", or they are unwilling to.

> the recent lawsuits that made the rounds on HN I happened to have missed those discussions, do you have some links you can point towards? thanks!

https://stablediffusionlitigation.com/

https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/

Both along with their respective HN threads.

Re: AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

#75

Post by thewakalix »

quadcore wrote: post #29

I have no clues about laws and stuff and as a software engineer, I'd say please replace me by machines i dont care all the contrary, let's go. But please, please, protect art making from machines. These paints made in those caves werent done during work hours, it was probably the first forms of leasure our ancestors experienced. The first forms of enjoyment in the rude life of early humans. I think there is some high…

That seems difficult when Stable Diffusion has already been freely released. It’s futile to apply artificial restrictions to libre software when they can just as easily be removed!

Re: AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

#76

Post by candiodari »

Taywee wrote: post #49

> If the AI industry is to survive, we need a clear legal rule that neural networks, and the outputs they produce, are not presumed to be copies of the data used to train them. Otherwise, the entire industry will be plagued with lawsuits that will stifle innovation and only enrich plaintiff’s lawyers Or maybe, get this, how about people running AI only feed them information that they legally have the right to use? Ho…

Copyright only governs publishing. So you have the right to train AI with any and all data you have access to, as far as copyright is concerned.

Re: AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

#77

Post by danbolt »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #72
danbolt wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to within a meaningful delta This feels like an argument for communism being the most productive system in theory. Most of the time I feel like I see uninspired material that’s tracing it’s own training data.

How is that any different from looking at human art?

When humans do it within a delta, it’s considered copyright infringement.

Machines currently are adept at making copies within a delta, hence articles such as this to limit copyright so the people who operate said machines can profit.

Re: AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

#78

Post by fzil »

phoe-krk wrote: post #74
fzil wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the recent lawsuits that made the rounds on HN I happened to have missed those discussions, do you have some links you can point towards? thanks!

https://stablediffusionlitigation.com/ https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/ Both along with their respective HN threads.

thanks a lot!

Re: AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

#79

Post by adrianN »

Taywee wrote: post #49

> If the AI industry is to survive, we need a clear legal rule that neural networks, and the outputs they produce, are not presumed to be copies of the data used to train them. Otherwise, the entire industry will be plagued with lawsuits that will stifle innovation and only enrich plaintiff’s lawyers Or maybe, get this, how about people running AI only feed them information that they legally have the right to use? Ho…

As an extension of this, only allow children to look at works they purchased publication rights to, lest their creative output becomes influenced by a different person's style.

Re: AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

#80

Post by firstbabylonian »

adrianN wrote: post #79
Taywee wrote: post #49

> If the AI industry is to survive, we need a clear legal rule that neural networks, and the outputs they produce, are not presumed to be copies of the data used to train them. Otherwise, the entire industry will be plagued with lawsuits that will stifle innovation and only enrich plaintiff’s lawyers Or maybe, get this, how about people running AI only feed them information that they legally have the right to use? Ho…

As an extension of this, only allow children to look at works they purchased publication rights to, lest their creative output becomes influenced by a different person's style.

AI is not human children.
Post reply on HN