6 ms·

It’s very probably fair use under current copyright laws. The things is that the game is changing very rapidly. Right now it’s suffering from criticism in terms

It’s very probably fair use under current copyright laws. The things is that the game is changing very rapidly. Right now it’s suffering from criticism in terms of how it affects the society and allows people to generate unwanted images, and merely copyright laws may not be sufficient to protect them. And it has already caught the regulator’s attention so even the law could be rewritten around these models.

williamcotton 4y ago
At least in the United States there is the jurisprudence of stare decisis. Case law is the only place where the details of how copyright are applied to software are hashed out. I don’t see this changing in the foreseeable future.
- notacoward 4y ago
  > Case law is the only place where the details of how copyright are applied to software are hashed out Incorrect. In the absence of new legislation case law is how these things get worked out, but new statutes could be passed and could void prior case law.
  - williamcotton 4y ago
    Well that's a given in a discussion around common law jurisprudence. I still think it is highly unlikely that this changes. This issue doesn't seem to be making or breaking the political careers of the members of legislative branch anytime soon. https://www.copyright.gov/title17/title17.pdf https://www.copyright.gov/title17/title17.pdf Let me expand on this a bit... if you read through the above text (feel free to search for the below terms) of the current laws around copyright you will notice that there is no discussion of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure,_sequence_and_organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure,_sequence_and_organi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction-Filtration-Comparison_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction-Filtration-Compari... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea–expression_distinction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea–expression_distinction These legal doctrines are the result of the details as hashed out in case law. This is distinct from countries that use civil law jurisprudence. Common law jurisprudence relies heavily on case law.
    - notacoward 4y ago
      > Well that's a given Funny way to admit that your original statement was flat-out wrong. There is no separate "civil law jurisprudence" and "common law jurisprudence". Common law by itself is by definition not jurisprudence. Civil law combines aspects of statutory and common law (as one form of precedent) into a single system. Some aspects of common law even make their way into criminal law. Instead of just Googling for buzzwords, learn what they mean before you try to bluster your way through an argument with them.
pmoriarty 4y ago
"it has already caught the regulator’s attention so even the law could be rewritten around these models" The law moves slow. Even were that to happen eventually, the laws will very likely be challenged in courts, and those will take a while to be resolved. Finally, even if the US outlaws this, there'll be plenty of other countries where it'll be legal. There's plenty of infringement of US copyright in China, for instance. The same is likely to happen in regards to AI that's illegal in the US but legal elsewhere. By the time the law catches up, model creation may become so easy to create by individuals instead of just by deep-pocketed corporations, it may be practically impossible to stop.

williamcotton 4y ago

At least in the United States there is the jurisprudence of stare decisis. Case law is the only place where the details of how copyright are applied to software are hashed out. I don’t see this changing in the foreseeable future.

notacoward 4y ago
> Case law is the only place where the details of how copyright are applied to software are hashed out Incorrect. In the absence of new legislation case law is how these things get worked out, but new statutes could be passed and could void prior case law.
- williamcotton 4y ago
  Well that's a given in a discussion around common law jurisprudence. I still think it is highly unlikely that this changes. This issue doesn't seem to be making or breaking the political careers of the members of legislative branch anytime soon. https://www.copyright.gov/title17/title17.pdf https://www.copyright.gov/title17/title17.pdf Let me expand on this a bit... if you read through the above text (feel free to search for the below terms) of the current laws around copyright you will notice that there is no discussion of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure,_sequence_and_organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure,_sequence_and_organi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction-Filtration-Comparison_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction-Filtration-Compari... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea–expression_distinction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea–expression_distinction These legal doctrines are the result of the details as hashed out in case law. This is distinct from countries that use civil law jurisprudence. Common law jurisprudence relies heavily on case law.
  - notacoward 4y ago
    > Well that's a given Funny way to admit that your original statement was flat-out wrong. There is no separate "civil law jurisprudence" and "common law jurisprudence". Common law by itself is by definition not jurisprudence. Civil law combines aspects of statutory and common law (as one form of precedent) into a single system. Some aspects of common law even make their way into criminal law. Instead of just Googling for buzzwords, learn what they mean before you try to bluster your way through an argument with them.

pmoriarty 4y ago

"it has already caught the regulator’s attention so even the law could be rewritten around these models" The law moves slow. Even were that to happen eventually, the laws will very likely be challenged in courts, and those will take a while to be resolved. Finally, even if the US outlaws this, there'll be plenty of other countries where it'll be legal. There's plenty of infringement of US copyright in China, for instance. The same is likely to happen in regards to AI that's illegal in the US but legal elsewhere. By the time the law catches up, model creation may become so easy to create by individuals instead of just by deep-pocketed corporations, it may be practically impossible to stop.