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

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
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
1 point

Yeah, no, stop with the goddamn tone policing. I have zero interest in vagueposting and high-horse riding.

As for what I want, I want generative AI banned entirely, or at minimum restricted to training on works that are either in the public domain, or that the person creating the training model received explicit, opt-in consent to use. This is the supposed gold standard everyone demands when it comes to the widescale collection and processing of personal data that they generate just through their normal, everyday activities, why should it be different for the widescale collection and processing of the stuff we actually put our effort into creating?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

As for what I want, I want generative AI banned entirely,

Well, you can see the moral (and political!) problem here. Maybe the people who crunched numbers before electric computers wanted them banned. Maybe people who make diesel engines want EVs banned. That’s asking the public to take a hit for the benefit of a small group. Morality aside, it’s politically unlikely.

or at minimum restricted to training on works that are either in the public domain, or that the person creating the training model received explicit, opt-in consent to use.

This is somewhat more likely. But what then?

I’ll start. Opt-in means that you have to obtain a license to AI train with something. You have to pay the owner of the intellectual property. What does this mean in our economy? What happens?

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

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 507K

    Comments