3 ms·
Computers aren't people. Software isn't humans.
by tumult 4y ago
Computers aren't people. Software isn't humans.
- _aavaa_ 4y agoThat’s irrelevant, the argument is that copyrighted work shouldn’t be used to influence new work.
- auggierose 4y agoNo, the argument is that humans are treated differently than hardware/software before the law.
- _aavaa_ 4y agoI think we're reading different threads. As others have already mentioned here before: - a "style" isn't copyright-able - Looking at how others have done art, imitating them to learn, and then combining what we learned with everything else we've seen in our life is how humans produce art. And it's the same way that stablediffusion produces art: train on data, reproduce based on what it's learned, combine everything its seen with a prompt to create something new.
- Gigachad 4y agoHow do you know. If I stick up an image on the internet. Its legal if I made it myself in photoshop, but illegal if it was mostly generated? But what if I just say I made it myself? This is different to most copyright cases where all that matters is the end result, not the process.
- dr_dshiv 4y agoBut people are computers —that’s the point.