4 ms·

> Do you ask for permission when you train your mind on copyrighted books? Or observe paintings? Or listen to music? Plenty of people have been successfully su

> Do you ask for permission when you train your mind on copyrighted books? Or observe paintings? Or listen to music? Plenty of people have been successfully sued if their work is too similar to existing content. This isn’t a new concept that AI is throwing into contention, it’s literally just companies trying to side step copyright law because of “disruption”. Source: I work for a company in this field and we do gain permission from creators before training our models on their content. It’s very possible to operate this way but a lot of companies simply choose not to.

rvz 4y ago
Exactly. Somehow it is so 'hard' for many AI companies to ask for permission to use and monetize copyrighted images in the training set these days and instead of asking permission, they attempt to bypass copyright law and give out frequent useless excuses from AI bros like: 'but muh fair use tho', 'oh well genie's out of the bottle it's too late', 'oops, cat's out of the bag, but you can opt out now'. Little do some of them know that OpenAI was able to get permission from Shutterstock via a partnership to use their copyrighted images in the training set for DALL-E 2. [0] There is also a reason why Dance Diffusion was trained on only public domain music and copyrighted music which has the actual permission from the authors. [1] If they did otherwise and monetized on copyrighted music without the permission from musicians or record labels, they would be sued to the ground. With the recent cases of Getty, Shutterstock, and even as admitted by the CEO of Stability themselves [2], the way forward for using copyrighted images in the training set for commercial purposes, is via licensing. Neither Getty or Shutterstock are looking for banning it, despite the AI bros claiming that these companies are trying to. If not, just train only on public domain images to avoid these legal issues. [0] https://www.shutterstock.com/press/20435 https://www.shutterstock.com/press/20435 [1] https://techcrunch.com/2022/10/07/ai-music-generator-dance-diffusion/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/10/07/ai-music-generator-dance-d... [2] https://twitter.com/EMostaque/status/1603390169192833027 https://twitter.com/EMostaque/status/1603390169192833027
- danielbln 4y ago
  Can we maybe drop the whole sneery "AI bro" lingo? HN is not the right place for that.[0] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - rvz 4y ago
    > HN is not the right place for that. Where in the guidelines does it mention that one cannot say 'tech bro, finance bro, pharma bro, and more recently and most actively the crypto bro'? These have been there for years despite the guidelines existing. Me saying 'AI bros' is no different. Given it is fine to mention the tech bros, finance bros, crypto bros and the other, then it is also fine to say 'AI bros'.

rvz 4y ago

Exactly. Somehow it is so 'hard' for many AI companies to ask for permission to use and monetize copyrighted images in the training set these days and instead of asking permission, they attempt to bypass copyright law and give out frequent useless excuses from AI bros like: 'but muh fair use tho', 'oh well genie's out of the bottle it's too late', 'oops, cat's out of the bag, but you can opt out now'. Little do some of them know that OpenAI was able to get permission from Shutterstock via a partnership to use their copyrighted images in the training set for DALL-E 2. [0] There is also a reason why Dance Diffusion was trained on only public domain music and copyrighted music which has the actual permission from the authors. [1] If they did otherwise and monetized on copyrighted music without the permission from musicians or record labels, they would be sued to the ground. With the recent cases of Getty, Shutterstock, and even as admitted by the CEO of Stability themselves [2], the way forward for using copyrighted images in the training set for commercial purposes, is via licensing. Neither Getty or Shutterstock are looking for banning it, despite the AI bros claiming that these companies are trying to. If not, just train only on public domain images to avoid these legal issues. [0] https://www.shutterstock.com/press/20435 https://www.shutterstock.com/press/20435 [1] https://techcrunch.com/2022/10/07/ai-music-generator-dance-diffusion/ https://techcrunch.com/2022/10/07/ai-music-generator-dance-d... [2] https://twitter.com/EMostaque/status/1603390169192833027 https://twitter.com/EMostaque/status/1603390169192833027

danielbln 4y ago
Can we maybe drop the whole sneery "AI bro" lingo? HN is not the right place for that.[0] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- rvz 4y ago
  > HN is not the right place for that. Where in the guidelines does it mention that one cannot say 'tech bro, finance bro, pharma bro, and more recently and most actively the crypto bro'? These have been there for years despite the guidelines existing. Me saying 'AI bros' is no different. Given it is fine to mention the tech bros, finance bros, crypto bros and the other, then it is also fine to say 'AI bros'.