3 ms·

Absolutely, but any music you compose probably also has an element of originality in it, or at least draws inspiration from something that is non-musical in nat

by jfoster 11y ago

Absolutely, but any music you compose probably also has an element of originality in it, or at least draws inspiration from something that is non-musical in nature. For a trained AI, the entire model is just a derivative work of all the training data. It's not as though the AI had a lover who left them and drew inspiration from that experience to become a more effective AI.

lallysingh 11y ago
So to avoid the copyright situation, I just mix in some random nonce data, infinitesimally small, to make it equivalent?
- jfoster 11y ago
  Maybe that fixes it. Maybe you don't even have to if the copyright question only ever remains theoretical. I have a feeling it might only be a matter of time until this question arises in a case, though.
squeaky-clean 11y ago
> It's not as though the AI had a lover who left them and drew inspiration from that experience to become a more effective AI. Well then your ex-lover clearly deserves co-songwriting credits. As well as their parents. And anybody who has influenced them personally, or even anyone who made the food that they've eaten. There's gotta be a point at which the original is just too far removed from the end result for it to be infringing, otherwise you could just keep going. Also is a model that classifies things isn't the same as those things themselves, or images of those things, and would most I certainly hope it would be considered transformative enough to not be infringing (I am not a lawyer though). I could give it an image of a dog, and it will tell me what it thinks it is. But there doesn't seem to be any way for me to say "show me a dog" and get back any sort of image, infringing or not. Some thought experiments: Let's say you have a copyrighted photo, and I design an API that allows anyone to upload a photo and get a true/false of whether or not it's the same file as your photo. Is this copyright infringement if I never release the original photo?
bduerst 11y ago
>but any music you compose probably also has an element of originality in it Is deep dream original in your opinion?

by jfoster 11y ago

lallysingh 11y ago

So to avoid the copyright situation, I just mix in some random nonce data, infinitesimally small, to make it equivalent?

jfoster 11y ago
Maybe that fixes it. Maybe you don't even have to if the copyright question only ever remains theoretical. I have a feeling it might only be a matter of time until this question arises in a case, though.

squeaky-clean 11y ago

> It's not as though the AI had a lover who left them and drew inspiration from that experience to become a more effective AI. Well then your ex-lover clearly deserves co-songwriting credits. As well as their parents. And anybody who has influenced them personally, or even anyone who made the food that they've eaten. There's gotta be a point at which the original is just too far removed from the end result for it to be infringing, otherwise you could just keep going. Also is a model that classifies things isn't the same as those things themselves, or images of those things, and would most I certainly hope it would be considered transformative enough to not be infringing (I am not a lawyer though). I could give it an image of a dog, and it will tell me what it thinks it is. But there doesn't seem to be any way for me to say "show me a dog" and get back any sort of image, infringing or not. Some thought experiments: Let's say you have a copyrighted photo, and I design an API that allows anyone to upload a photo and get a true/false of whether or not it's the same file as your photo. Is this copyright infringement if I never release the original photo?

bduerst 11y ago

>but any music you compose probably also has an element of originality in it Is deep dream original in your opinion?