4 ms·

You're kind of arguing against a straw man. The people who don't like these models don't like the ones that are posed to replace artists. They are not really

You're kind of arguing against a straw man. The people who don't like these models don't like the ones that are posed to replace artists. They are not really worried about stuff like clip groups images together. I do believe that makes their copyright argument slightly bad faith. They only valid argument in this context would be that they are angry that stable diffusion is distributing their images, because training on their images clearly hasn't been an issue for at least a decade.

williamcotton 4y ago
That is of course the point I am making. I don’t see how it is a straw man at all. CLIP is an integral part of Stable Diffusion and where all of the artist’s names are embedded. It has the exact same issues with fair use as any other model that has trained on data without permission. The courts have already made a distinction between the tool and the outputs of the tool, starting with Sony v Universal. The SD defense will absolutely use programs such as this iOS CLIP app to show “commercially significant fair use”. Someone can’t say that a model is fair use when used for natural language search of their own photos but then that same model is not fair use when used to create a new image. The model is either fair use or not. The outputs are either infringing or not, and this assessment is not based on the tool used whatsoever.