OpenAI's latest image-generation update has taken social media by storm, as users are flooding X, Instagram, and Reddit with Studio Ghibli-style images
That should be the headline. Assuming it was done without consent, which lets face it, it most likely was.
Edit: It came to my attention that Japan has a more open stance to AI training on copyright materials.
It does however say that
Accordingly, the focus is that ingestion of copyrighted material is prohibited if the intention is to output products that can be perceived as creative expressions of copyrighted works, including mimicking the style of specific creators.
Not a laywer but all these memes created by the ChatGPT look like creative expressions that mimic the style.
The way Altman whines about how much he should be allowed to steal people’s work to feed his bottom line, I have no doubt whatsoever that this is the case.
These people from the Silicon Valley see themselves as the saviours of mankind (look up Longtermism in Silicon Valley). Within their structure of believe anything is within reason as long as it serves the greater good. That includes anything from obviously breaking the law to outright genocide, which we see in action right now.
Of course since their moral code is already eroded to its core there are no boundaries, like “I shouldn’t molest other people”…
But one of the biggest issue with these people is the total disconnect from actual normal life and communities. They see everything as computer program or tech device.
Just like that millionaire trying to extend his life with thousand dollars worth of pills a month and daily schedules impossible to normal working people. When what research has shown is that people who live the longest have plant based diets and are active members of their communities.
Like all other AI and all the copyright in the world. Shareholders are ok with. Copyright for me, not for you. Pirates were the bad guys. These are the saviours we deserve.
If you listen to the red hot chili peppers or watch a marvel movie or look at a DC comic and then go and make a song, movie, or painting inspired by the style of a certain creator that does not mean you have somehow violated those creators copyright. You don’t owe them any money because you took inspiration.
AI training on publicly available data does not infringe on copyright even if that data is somehow copyrighted.
And I know that many people on these kinds of platforms don’t like to hear this but the benefits of AI outweighs any potential legal issues copyright might entail.
Moreover, and I keep pointing this out over and over, you can’t have the same information free for individuals to use and have it paid for at the same time for corporations. You have to decide if you want that information free for all or for none.
Edit: yes yes. I know y’all don’t like these facts and yet they’re undisputed.
If the people who make llms are illegally acquiring copywrited material without paying for it then the creators of the llms should be held accountable by the authority figures that govern such crimes and infringments. Absolutely. That was never in question or a relevant point in this discussion.
You’re the one saying that copywrite shouldn’t exist and you should be able to use all and any material you wish for any reason at any time.
Insane American copywrite laws not withstanding copywrite generally protects the creators of their work from others profiting off of it.
Seems this is legal now. Keep this in mind, when the next video game decompilation project comes along because that’s also machine-generated material based on copyrighted released media. That must be equally as legal now.
Shouldn’t’t need it. Instead I say the push should be that any AI trained on public resources must remain public and any derivative of that model also must remain publicly available.
So was it trained on his work without his approval?
That should be the headline. Assuming it was done without consent, which lets face it, it most likely was.
Edit: It came to my attention that Japan has a more open stance to AI training on copyright materials. It does however say that
Not a laywer but all these memes created by the ChatGPT look like creative expressions that mimic the style.
Read more here
The way Altman whines about how much he should be allowed to steal people’s work to feed his bottom line, I have no doubt whatsoever that this is the case.
Altman doesn’t seemed to be concerned with consent in general.
These people from the Silicon Valley see themselves as the saviours of mankind (look up Longtermism in Silicon Valley). Within their structure of believe anything is within reason as long as it serves the greater good. That includes anything from obviously breaking the law to outright genocide, which we see in action right now.
Of course since their moral code is already eroded to its core there are no boundaries, like “I shouldn’t molest other people”…
But one of the biggest issue with these people is the total disconnect from actual normal life and communities. They see everything as computer program or tech device.
Just like that millionaire trying to extend his life with thousand dollars worth of pills a month and daily schedules impossible to normal working people. When what research has shown is that people who live the longest have plant based diets and are active members of their communities.
Since when do rich billionaires care about consent??
Like all other AI and all the copyright in the world. Shareholders are ok with. Copyright for me, not for you. Pirates were the bad guys. These are the saviours we deserve.
If you listen to the red hot chili peppers or watch a marvel movie or look at a DC comic and then go and make a song, movie, or painting inspired by the style of a certain creator that does not mean you have somehow violated those creators copyright. You don’t owe them any money because you took inspiration.
AI training on publicly available data does not infringe on copyright even if that data is somehow copyrighted.
And I know that many people on these kinds of platforms don’t like to hear this but the benefits of AI outweighs any potential legal issues copyright might entail.
Moreover, and I keep pointing this out over and over, you can’t have the same information free for individuals to use and have it paid for at the same time for corporations. You have to decide if you want that information free for all or for none.
Edit: yes yes. I know y’all don’t like these facts and yet they’re undisputed.
Who’s watching marvel movies for free, legally? Who’s listening to RHCP’s entire discography for free, legally?
Not the people training AI, they’ve been caught pirating their data multiple times.
No one is. That’s exactly the point.
Llms aren’t recreating copyrighted works. They’re drawing inspiration if you will. No copyright is being infringed.
And how is an LLM trained to “draw inspiration” from an author without reading their books?
That’s exactly what it is. But it’s not replicating the book to sell that same book to generate profit the author of the book won’t get.
It’s using the information in the book to generate its own data.
Are you aware of how llms work?
Ok, so if the LLM was trained by reading the books, then the LLM creators should have to buy a copy of the books, right?
Because right now the creators are pirating the books to feed into the machine.
If the people who make llms are illegally acquiring copywrited material without paying for it then the creators of the llms should be held accountable by the authority figures that govern such crimes and infringments. Absolutely. That was never in question or a relevant point in this discussion.
You’re the one saying that copywrite shouldn’t exist and you should be able to use all and any material you wish for any reason at any time.
Insane American copywrite laws not withstanding copywrite generally protects the creators of their work from others profiting off of it.
Seems this is legal now. Keep this in mind, when the next video game decompilation project comes along because that’s also machine-generated material based on copyrighted released media. That must be equally as legal now.
Everything was. Is …
deleted by creator
Hopefully. It makes cool pictures.
I said without, I wouldn’t believe they got his approval…
Shouldn’t’t need it. Instead I say the push should be that any AI trained on public resources must remain public and any derivative of that model also must remain publicly available.