3 ms·

There is absolutely no comparison here, because children don't charge you to look at their artwork, if you ask nicely, they will probably give it to you for fre

There is absolutely no comparison here, because children don't charge you to look at their artwork, if you ask nicely, they will probably give it to you for free. Companies using other peoples work without permission to train AI, will charge. Your suggestion would be accurate if we lived in a world where we all shared, and there was no money, and copyright didn't exist, but we don't.

adrianN 4y ago
It is my understanding that it makes no legal difference (at least in my country) whether I charge for my work or not when it infringes somebody's copyright. Simply sharing it is sufficient to get into trouble.
- LtWorf 4y ago
  I don't know from which weird country you're from, but in mine profiting from it changes things a lot.
  - oneeyedpigeon 4y ago
    It sounds like your country is the weird one. Try burning the complete works of Disney onto stacks of DVDs, then go down to your high street and hand them out. See how long you get away with that for.
    - b112 4y ago
      I think the big difference is distribution vs consumption. Where I live, there are additional clauses in law, for mass reproduction and selling. But republishing any work as your own, probably falls into that category. And it isn't about profit, but commercial use; thus pasting onto a blog to improve your business (rankings, hit count) is a business use case.
    - LtWorf 4y ago
      Unless I do like millions of them, literally nothing would happen.
      - Dylan16807 4y ago
        Do you think they would act much faster if you charged a dollar or five? I don't.
    - freejazz 4y ago
      It's ultimately a commercial use because you are directly affecting Disney's market. This should be obvious.
est31 4y ago
There are plenty of competitors to the corporate AI models that are freely distributed, free to use, etc. You just need to have the hardware, which is admittedly pricey. The worst outcome is if there is a legal risk in creating AI models that only big companies with an army of lawyers large enough to fend off lawsuits can afford to face. Then you'd have the continuation of big tech controlling things for "responsibility" reasons instead of AI being a technology anybody can use.

adrianN 4y ago

It is my understanding that it makes no legal difference (at least in my country) whether I charge for my work or not when it infringes somebody's copyright. Simply sharing it is sufficient to get into trouble.

LtWorf 4y ago
I don't know from which weird country you're from, but in mine profiting from it changes things a lot.
- oneeyedpigeon 4y ago
  It sounds like your country is the weird one. Try burning the complete works of Disney onto stacks of DVDs, then go down to your high street and hand them out. See how long you get away with that for.
  - b112 4y ago
    I think the big difference is distribution vs consumption. Where I live, there are additional clauses in law, for mass reproduction and selling. But republishing any work as your own, probably falls into that category. And it isn't about profit, but commercial use; thus pasting onto a blog to improve your business (rankings, hit count) is a business use case.
  - LtWorf 4y ago
    Unless I do like millions of them, literally nothing would happen.
    - Dylan16807 4y ago
      Do you think they would act much faster if you charged a dollar or five? I don't.
  - freejazz 4y ago
    It's ultimately a commercial use because you are directly affecting Disney's market. This should be obvious.

est31 4y ago

There are plenty of competitors to the corporate AI models that are freely distributed, free to use, etc. You just need to have the hardware, which is admittedly pricey. The worst outcome is if there is a legal risk in creating AI models that only big companies with an army of lawyers large enough to fend off lawsuits can afford to face. Then you'd have the continuation of big tech controlling things for "responsibility" reasons instead of AI being a technology anybody can use.