GenAI tools ‘could not exist’ if firms are made to pay copyright::undefined

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
2 points

So because corps abuse copyright, that means I should be fine with AI companies taking whatever I write–all the journal entries, short stories, blog posts, tweets, comments, etc.–and putting it through their model without being asked, and with no ability to opt out? My artist friends should be fine with their art galleries being used to train the AI models that are actively being used to deprive them of their livelihood without any ability to say “I don’t want the fruits of my labor to be used in this way?”

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

This is the problem people have

They don’t see artists and creators as worth protecting. They’d rather screw over every small creator and take away control of their works, just because “it’d be hard to train without copyrighted data”

Plenty of creators would opt in if given the option, but I’m going to guess a large portion will not.

I don’t want my works training what will replace me, and right now copyright is the only way we can defend what was made.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s like nobody here actually knows someone who is actually creative or has bothered making anything creative themselves

I don’t even have a financial interest in it because there’s no way my job could be automated, and I don’t have any chance of making any kind of money off my trash. I still wouldn’t let LLMs train with my work, and I have a feeling that the vast majority of people would do the same

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

The concept of copyright is insane to begin with. Corps don’t make it bad - it starts out bad.

It’s an invented right.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I don’t know if your fears about your friends’ livelihood are justified, but cutting down on fair use will not help at all. In fact, it would make their situation worse. Think through what would actually happen.

When you publish something you have to accept that people will make it their own to some degree. Think parody or R34. It may be hurtful, but the alternative is so much worse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Huh? How does that follow at all? Judging that the specific use of training LLMs–which absolutely flunks the “amount and substantiality of the portion taken” (since it’s taking the whole damn work) and “the effect on the market” (fucking DUH) tests–isn’t fair use in no way impacts parody or R34. It’s the same kind of logic the GOP uses when they say “if the IRS cracks down on billionaires evading taxes then Blue Collar Joe is going to get audited!”

Fuck outta here with that insane clown logic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I think you would find it easier to help your friends if you approached the matter with reason rather than emotion. Your take on fair use isn’t is missing a lot, but that’s beside the point.

Assume you get what you wanted are asking for. What then?

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

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


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 543K

    Comments