3 ms·
> Are image generators giving exact (or very similar) copies of existing works? um, yes.[1][2] What else would they be trained on? According to the model card
by riversflow 4y ago
> Are image generators giving exact (or very similar) copies of existing works?
um, yes.[1][2] What else would they be trained on?
According to the model card:
[1] https://github.com/CompVis/stable-diffusion/blob/main/Stable_Diffusion_v1_Model_Card.md https://github.com/CompVis/stable-diffusion/blob/main/Stable...
it was trained on this data set(which has hyperlinks to images, so feel free to peruse):
[2] https://huggingface.co/datasets/laion/laion2B-en https://huggingface.co/datasets/laion/laion2B-en
- chii 4y ago> What else would they be trained on? why does it matter how it was trained? The question is, does the generative AI _output_ copyrighted images? Training is not a right that the copyright holder owns exclusively. Reproducing the works _is_, but if the AI only reproduces a style, but not a copy, then it isn't breaking any copyright.
- hutzlibu 4y agoYes, because real artists are also allowed to learn from other paintings. No problem there, unless they recreate the exact work of others.
- visarga 4y agoBanning AI from training on copyrighted works is also problematic because copyright doesn't protect ideas, it only protects expression. So the model has legitimate right to learn ideas (minus expression) from any source. For example facts in the phonebook are not copyrighted, the authors have to mix fake data to be able claim copyright infringement. Maybe the models could finally learn how many fingers to draw on a hand.
- riversflow 4y agoAgree 100%. I misread the post as "given" rather than "giving" and was answering what I perceived the question to be–are models given copyright images–oops.