4 ms·

I think we're facing a copyright extinction event. The whole concept is out of touch with the new reality - when you can generate 100 variations for your text,

I think we're facing a copyright extinction event. The whole concept is out of touch with the new reality - when you can generate 100 variations for your text, code or image with the click of a button, what does it even mean to hold copyright over the original? "In the style of" killed copyright in 2022.

UncleMeat 4y ago
How many people want to read AI generated text in the style of Lord of the Rings vs how many people want to read Lord of the Rings?
- visarga 4y ago
  Maybe it's not interesting to see what other people generate with it. I want to have chatGPT answer my questions, and reference materials when doing that. For example I could paste an article and start asking probing questions, debating it, asking for summary, ELI5, etc. It would be a research assistant and tutor.
- throwaway4aday 4y ago
  If an AI can generate an infinite number of stories that take place in the LotR world and do it well and faithfully in the style of JRR Tolkien then I would happily read it. You can only read the trilogy and The Hobbit so many times.
  - UncleMeat 4y ago
    You'd happily read it, but that's an answer to a different question. You've already read LotR. An AI generated novel in a similar style doesn't take money from Tolkien's estate. Some people will want to read the AI generated knockoff. That number of people will usually be much smaller than the number of people who want to read the original and many of those people interested in the AI generated knockoff will also read the original.
    - int_19h 4y ago
      The proportion really depends on 1) the quality of what the AI generates, and 2) expectations imposed by the society - in particular, how consumption of AI-generated stuff is perceived as a matter signaling of one's social class. Both are going to evolve rapidly, so it's really hard to tell where we're going to be in 10 years.
- PeterisP 4y ago
  With sufficient quality of the model I can certainly imagine people preferring to read AI generated text in the style of Lord of the Rings instead of the original, as the AI generation can adjust the content and style towards the interests of the particular reader, customizing it to deliver what they want. For example, one obvious observation from looking at fan fiction creations is that 'shipping' is popular, that certain people would strongly prefer certain characters to have romantic relations - and AI generated Lord of the Rings lookalike could have the story with the particular relationships that particular reader would prefer, based on an AI analysis of their earlier reactions to other books; this is not something that we have working today (as far as I know) but we're not that far from it becoming real.
londons_explore 4y ago
As someone who would vote to repeal copyright entirely, because I think its downsides outweigh its benefits, this is a good thing.
- satvikpendem 4y ago
  Agreed. I don't understand how people on threads like these turn into copyright hawks just because it seems to undermine their livelihoods, same as in the AI art threads. We should be abolishing copyright, not extending it.
- londons_explore 4y ago
  I'd actually cut the term of all existing copyrights/patents by a factor of 10 (ie. 70 years goes down to 7, 1 additional year if you aren't dead yet.). I'd then make a new combined copyright/patent system. You would get 1 year on anything creative. You can double the remaining time if you publish all the info necessary to easily recreate what you did. For software, that would be the source code. For music, the score and source recordings. For paintings, the source material and types of paint used, etc. For toys, the 3d design files, etc. 1/2 years of head start is plenty of head start to get your business going. I might make say a 10 year attribution requirement. I'd leave trademark law mostly as-is.
AlexandrB 4y ago
This is a pipe dream. There's too much money behind strictly enforcing copyright protections on commercial products. If anything gets killed, it's going to be automatic copyright protection for "little guys". Microsoft will be able to copy your publicly shared code/art/images willy-nilly but will still send their compliance officers to check that your company has a valid Office 365 license if they notice you writing a private letter in Word. Edit: If you doubt this, notice that co-pilot was trained on public, open-source code on Github. Not on Microsoft's/Github's own proprietary code. If co-pilot is truly so transformative that copyright doesn't apply, why not feed it all of Microsoft's code to train it better?
- visarga 4y ago
  I am sure they have an in-house model trained on all their code. It would be immensely more useful than a generic model.
- sebzim4500 4y ago
  >If you doubt this, notice that co-pilot was trained on public, open-source code on Github. Not on Microsoft's/Github's own proprietary code. If co-pilot is truly so transformative that copyright doesn't apply, why not feed it all of Microsoft's code to train it better? Presumably because there might be trade secrets in there that they don't want to leak. That seems entirely separate to copywrite to me.
- moyix 4y ago
  > If you doubt this, notice that co-pilot was trained on public, open-source code on Github. Not on Microsoft's/Github's own proprietary code. If co-pilot is truly so transformative that copyright doesn't apply, why not feed it all of Microsoft's code to train it better? I hear this argument a lot but I think the answer is actually pretty mundane: the model behind Copilot was trained by OpenAI, not Microsoft. Microsoft has a large investment in OpenAI, but they don't own the company, and AFAICT OpenAI did all of the scraping for Copilot on their own, without any special access to MS code.
marginalia_nu 4y ago
Haven't stepped on the right toes yet. Create code that will generate art "in the style of Disney/Nintendo" and hey would you look at that, copyright is back and alive again!

UncleMeat 4y ago

How many people want to read AI generated text in the style of Lord of the Rings vs how many people want to read Lord of the Rings?

visarga 4y ago
Maybe it's not interesting to see what other people generate with it. I want to have chatGPT answer my questions, and reference materials when doing that. For example I could paste an article and start asking probing questions, debating it, asking for summary, ELI5, etc. It would be a research assistant and tutor.
throwaway4aday 4y ago
If an AI can generate an infinite number of stories that take place in the LotR world and do it well and faithfully in the style of JRR Tolkien then I would happily read it. You can only read the trilogy and The Hobbit so many times.
- UncleMeat 4y ago
  You'd happily read it, but that's an answer to a different question. You've already read LotR. An AI generated novel in a similar style doesn't take money from Tolkien's estate. Some people will want to read the AI generated knockoff. That number of people will usually be much smaller than the number of people who want to read the original and many of those people interested in the AI generated knockoff will also read the original.
  - int_19h 4y ago
    The proportion really depends on 1) the quality of what the AI generates, and 2) expectations imposed by the society - in particular, how consumption of AI-generated stuff is perceived as a matter signaling of one's social class. Both are going to evolve rapidly, so it's really hard to tell where we're going to be in 10 years.
PeterisP 4y ago
With sufficient quality of the model I can certainly imagine people preferring to read AI generated text in the style of Lord of the Rings instead of the original, as the AI generation can adjust the content and style towards the interests of the particular reader, customizing it to deliver what they want. For example, one obvious observation from looking at fan fiction creations is that 'shipping' is popular, that certain people would strongly prefer certain characters to have romantic relations - and AI generated Lord of the Rings lookalike could have the story with the particular relationships that particular reader would prefer, based on an AI analysis of their earlier reactions to other books; this is not something that we have working today (as far as I know) but we're not that far from it becoming real.

londons_explore 4y ago

As someone who would vote to repeal copyright entirely, because I think its downsides outweigh its benefits, this is a good thing.

satvikpendem 4y ago
Agreed. I don't understand how people on threads like these turn into copyright hawks just because it seems to undermine their livelihoods, same as in the AI art threads. We should be abolishing copyright, not extending it.
londons_explore 4y ago
I'd actually cut the term of all existing copyrights/patents by a factor of 10 (ie. 70 years goes down to 7, 1 additional year if you aren't dead yet.). I'd then make a new combined copyright/patent system. You would get 1 year on anything creative. You can double the remaining time if you publish all the info necessary to easily recreate what you did. For software, that would be the source code. For music, the score and source recordings. For paintings, the source material and types of paint used, etc. For toys, the 3d design files, etc. 1/2 years of head start is plenty of head start to get your business going. I might make say a 10 year attribution requirement. I'd leave trademark law mostly as-is.

AlexandrB 4y ago

This is a pipe dream. There's too much money behind strictly enforcing copyright protections on commercial products. If anything gets killed, it's going to be automatic copyright protection for "little guys". Microsoft will be able to copy your publicly shared code/art/images willy-nilly but will still send their compliance officers to check that your company has a valid Office 365 license if they notice you writing a private letter in Word. Edit: If you doubt this, notice that co-pilot was trained on public, open-source code on Github. Not on Microsoft's/Github's own proprietary code. If co-pilot is truly so transformative that copyright doesn't apply, why not feed it all of Microsoft's code to train it better?

visarga 4y ago
I am sure they have an in-house model trained on all their code. It would be immensely more useful than a generic model.
sebzim4500 4y ago
>If you doubt this, notice that co-pilot was trained on public, open-source code on Github. Not on Microsoft's/Github's own proprietary code. If co-pilot is truly so transformative that copyright doesn't apply, why not feed it all of Microsoft's code to train it better? Presumably because there might be trade secrets in there that they don't want to leak. That seems entirely separate to copywrite to me.
moyix 4y ago
> If you doubt this, notice that co-pilot was trained on public, open-source code on Github. Not on Microsoft's/Github's own proprietary code. If co-pilot is truly so transformative that copyright doesn't apply, why not feed it all of Microsoft's code to train it better? I hear this argument a lot but I think the answer is actually pretty mundane: the model behind Copilot was trained by OpenAI, not Microsoft. Microsoft has a large investment in OpenAI, but they don't own the company, and AFAICT OpenAI did all of the scraping for Copilot on their own, without any special access to MS code.

marginalia_nu 4y ago

Haven't stepped on the right toes yet. Create code that will generate art "in the style of Disney/Nintendo" and hey would you look at that, copyright is back and alive again!