Live data from Hacker News

AI is in danger of being swallowed up by copyright law

heathermeeker.com

701–705 of 705 posts

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

#701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's about a law designed by humans to give everyone a chance to make a living and contribute to the common good. You think you have found a loophole in that law that lets you use that work for free and deny author's any compensation. Bear in mind, AI is not making artists or creative types obsolete - that would be fair game, just like computers made human calculators obsolete. No, this is about abusing other people'…

Copyright never guaranteed anyone compensation, nor is it loophole to not pay for copyright just because you saw and learned from something in the public domain. If using someone else work for learning is infringement, then that's going to cause a lot of difficulty for all artists. Try making a rock song without listening to rock, or paint some modern art without viewing it etc.

Copyright exists to protect human authors and promote creation, which in turn leads to learning - from other human beings. Algorithms are not learning, they are automated tools which are consuming creative works and outputing derivative works.

The loophole is to use copyrighted works for free despite no learning taking place - no human being observing and developing their skills based on that work - rather, an algorithm transforming those works into some other useful interpretation of them.

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

#702
post #641
post #505

If the AI wants to be exempt from being punished for training on copyrighted works the bare minimum standard is that it doesn’t accidentally copy and reproduce large portions of that work. There are quite a few examples of Stable Diffusion doing this so I think even that low bar is met. I think anyone sane doesn’t want to create AI immunity to copyright damages even when the network is “accidentally” producing copyri…

You can use a spoon to kill someone if you're motivated enough, but that doesn't make a spoon a killing weapon. Just because AI art models can reproduce copyright (if you try hard enough), doesn't mean that it's a copyright stealing machine.

No but reproducing a copyrighted work is a valid basis for an infringement case which shouldn't hinge on whether stealing the copyright is intentional or whether the methodology to do so is a "copyright stealing machine". Granting AI immunity to copyright when it's known to produce examples of infringement seems like stealing other people's work to me even if the infringement is unintentional.

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

#703
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human nature. We haven't changed that much in the past 50k years or so. Some people are very altruistic and giving, others not so much. An artist might club you over the head for stealing his techniques and ideas and copying them into a new portion of the cave or rock wall, others would have taught you and approved of your work.

> An artist might club you over the head for stealing his techniques and ideas and copying them into a new portion of the cave or rock wall, others would have taught you and approved of your work. Exactly. Same back then as today. An insecure cave person would be protective of their cave painting turf. A well-adjusted cave person (also likely more talented) would be sharing ideas and resources or have other work for/…

Are you at all familiar with the historiographical fallacy of presentism?

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

#704
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but what happened to the luddites?

>Mill and factory owners took to shooting protesters and eventually the movement was suppressed with legal and military force, which included execution and penal transportation of accused and convicted Luddites.

I meant what happened to them after the jobs were replaced with technology?

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

#705

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI doesn't copy one to one. It mixes, like humans.

Anthropomorphism isn't an argument.

I wouldn't bet for or against that without legal advice, and even then it might vary by jurisdiction. Legal fictions are a thing, but I'm no lawyer, and I know better than to assume my interpretation of any legal issue is any better than a Hollywood script writer's: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_fiction
Post reply on HN