• @interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    102 days ago

    Copyright infrigment is not theft, training models is not copyright infringement either. We need a law equivalent to when an artist says “he’s inpired by someone else” . That it specifically is illegal to do that without permission if you use a machine. That will force big tech to pay a pittance for it and it will instakill all the small player.

    • Elias Griffin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Copyright Infringment strawman argument. When considering AI, we are not talking legal copyright infringement in the relationship between humans vs AI. Humans are mostly concerned with being obsoleted by Big Tech so the real issue is Intellectual Property Theft.

      artificial INTELLIGENCE stole our Intellectual Property

      Do you see it now?

      • @interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 day ago

        It’s only theft as long as you cling to the failed “copyright” model.

        Big tech couldn’t steal anything if we don’t respect their property rights in the first place.

        By reifying copyright under the AI paradigm, we maintain big tech’s power over us.

        The truth is chatgpt belong to us. ClosedAI is just the compiler of the data.

        If we finally end the failed experiment of copyright, we destroy their mote.

      • @afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 days ago

        What I see is a system of laws that came about during the Middle Ages and have been manipulated by the powers that be to kill off any good parts of them.

        We all knew copyright was broken. It was broken before my grandparents were born. It didn’t encourage artists or promise them proper income, it didn’t allow creations to gradually move into public domain. It punished all forms of innovation from player pianos to fanfiction on Tumblr.