4 ms·

> Would you dramatically expand what you can legally borrow without infringing or just allow wholesale automated washing from one copyright to another? You're

> Would you dramatically expand what you can legally borrow without infringing or just allow wholesale automated washing from one copyright to another? You're acting like we don't already have something similar. We do. It's called fair use. (: I'd probably just expand on that. If the portion of the work generated by a model is insubstantial, and/or doesn't harm the interests of the original rights holder then it should be okay. If your model can generate a single excerpt of Harry Potter does that constitute harm to J.K. Rowling? Can you use it to reasonably generate a substantial portion of the book with it? Is it a reasonable substitute for buying the book? No? Then it's okay. Some countries in fact do already have such exceptions, e.g. Japan amended its copyright law in 2018 to explicitly allow for this. To quote the relevant law: > "It is permissible to exploit work in any way and to the extent considered necessary ...where such exploitation is not for enjoying or causing another person to enjoy the ideas or emotions expressed in such work..." So if you want to train an ML model on a bunch of commercial novels, without the permission of their owners, and then exploit that commercially - you can do it, and it's completely legal.

6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
Harm is weird. If I sell bootleg copies of harry potter, I'm not harming anyone in any sense but opportunity cost. Sales that would have happened didn't occur. The law sees that as harm. Personally, I'd like not have my IP used in training ML models. If they want to incorporate my stuff into their training data, they can do it on my terms, which would be either paying to license my work, or something along the lines of a new kind of copyleft license where the model has to be public and copyleft too. By including my work anyways, I didn't get the terms I would have needed. Scale makes it weird, because it's the a-drop-of-water-in-an-ocean issue, but harm is still real harm when it's split into a billion separate pieces of infinitesimal harm.

6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago

Harm is weird. If I sell bootleg copies of harry potter, I'm not harming anyone in any sense but opportunity cost. Sales that would have happened didn't occur. The law sees that as harm. Personally, I'd like not have my IP used in training ML models. If they want to incorporate my stuff into their training data, they can do it on my terms, which would be either paying to license my work, or something along the lines of a new kind of copyleft license where the model has to be public and copyleft too. By including my work anyways, I didn't get the terms I would have needed. Scale makes it weird, because it's the a-drop-of-water-in-an-ocean issue, but harm is still real harm when it's split into a billion separate pieces of infinitesimal harm.