10 ms·

"The painting, called Portrait of Edmond Belamy, was created by a Paris-based art collective called Obvious." Hopefully the person who wrote the code, freely s

• logfromblammo 8y ago
  It isn't required by the license, but it is required by the primate fairness sense. A donation to the open-source project would be appropriate. Alternatively, the Obvious collective will be now and forevermore tagged as non-contributing leeches. Which will likely not tarnish their enjoyment of their $144k each before auction fees and taxes, but might discourage future AI/ML developers from releasing under such a permissive license in the future.
  • therein 8y ago
    > Alternatively, the Obvious collective will be now and forevermore tagged as non-contributing leeches. Exactly. It doesn't sound like they are afraid of this but they really should be. Nobody will want to buy the next artwork of a collective with that reputation.
    • gowld 8y ago
      The people who pay fortunes for framed art don't know or care about open source licensing.
    • Springtime 8y ago
      I do wonder how many art collectors who would be interested in such pieces would know or care. To me the sale was due to the way it was promoted and sold rather than any merit of the piece itself. Outside of particular tech story comment sections and who've seen the Twitter threads I'm not sure it's going to be some big controversy.
• TangoTrotFox 8y ago
  Unfortunately I do not think this is realistic. When somebody puts code out for free, without any binding restrictions on its use, they should not expect to be privy to profits generated from that code. Often times they'll struggle to even receive credit. I don't say this because its my personal view -- every open source project I've used I try to contribute to in one way or another, and actively ensure that the author's receive fair credit even when their license does not require as such. But my view is based on reality. There are many people that are not like this. You give them something and they will simply take it. The actual creator or provider of what was given will be out of their mind before nightfall. Or in a work environment you may see people work themselves to death trying to get ahead only to find out that the person one notch ahead of them on the hierarchy had been happily taking credit for everything they were doing, and reaping all the accolades for such. This is something that I think people should consider much more carefully before deciding to make their code freely available. You may indeed make society a better place, but there's a very good chance that you will receive no credit, let alone reward, for your role in it. If you consider that acceptable then take it a step further to consider that somebody else will, not infrequently, end up taking credit and reward for your work. If people were naturally driven to always want to reciprocate with reasonable value, the history of our species would be rather different.