3 ms·

The computer can generate artwork for your game, but only after training on other people's artwork that they spent effort and time creating. I think auto-genera

The computer can generate artwork for your game, but only after training on other people's artwork that they spent effort and time creating. I think auto-generating art from other people's creations and hard work is wrong personally, unless they have specifically granted that permission when sharing their work. You are basically side-stepping paying for artists by laundering their work in my eyes. If you trained only on things that granted you permission to do so, or if you bought a bunch of art works to train on this would be really cool. I am interested in seeing how this turns out legally. Copyright law is intended to protect humans and their intellectual property, and these "AI" or "ML" systems are not humans, so I am not so confident that generating work from other peoples is going to be legal.

shadowgovt 4y ago
> I think auto-generating art from other people's creations and hard work is wrong personally, unless they have specifically granted that permission when sharing their work. I think this is going to be one of the more interesting aspects of any attempt to ban the sort of technology, because a system like stable diffusion is just a denoiser attached to an image fitness algorithm that has been trained on a bunch of input. And we certainly can't make training such algorithms illegal; if we do, YouTube loses the ability to police uploads to its site overnight because such image recognizers can also be used to detect likely instances of copyright infringement.