this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
430 points (83.1% liked)

Technology

55940 readers
4809 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

We Asked A.I. to Create the Joker. It Generated a Copyrighted Image.::Artists and researchers are exposing copyrighted material hidden within A.I. tools, raising fresh legal questions.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago (4 children)

You don't need new laws to get it right.

You say this because you think you understand copyright law. If you actually knew anything about copyright law, you'd never say this. Nobody who understands copyright law thinks it's been done right, unless they're getting rich off of it.

Scraping data has been allowed for decades. It's the foundation of image search engines. We allowed large-scale image scraping and categorization this whole time because we liked the results. Now that there are results we don't like, we have a lot of back-pedaling to do if we want something different. New laws would need to be written to reign this in, and those laws might end up destroying the efficacy of image search engines in the process.

As understandably upset that artists get that AI "steals their style", existing copyright law allows me, without an AI, to steal anyone's style that I want to, because artistic style cannot be copyrighted. If you want to protect artistic styles from being stolen by an AI, you need new laws to protect styles because they don't currently exist at all. Those laws might end up having a chilling effect on things like parody and satire if aesthetics can be owned and protected.

And this is just arguing against the ways the system isn't, as you claim, already prepared to handle the concerns surrounding AI. There are countless other shortcomings. The entire system is broken, partly because it was conceived pre-Internet and hasn't aged well into the modern age, but mostly because it protects giant corporations above all, so remember that when you're begging it to protect small artists from big tech companies.

[–] ombremad@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

Yes, most image search engines are also unlawful. Google knows that firsthand. It's not because it exists that it's legal? You seem to believe that.

It's almost like if big tech corporations don't care about laws, and the problem is elsewhere?

[–] adrian783@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

even if it is currently lawful... why can't we make new laws or change laws now the considerations are completely different?

[–] ombremad@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 months ago

Because that’s not really how laws work. You don’t add laws over laws to just state the same thing again. Legal books are already fat enough.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)