4 ms·
>It's interesting to ask people who are concerned about the training data what they think of Adobe Firefly, which is strictly trained on correctly licensed data
by Jevon23 3y ago
>It's interesting to ask people who are concerned about the training data what they think of Adobe Firefly, which is strictly trained on correctly licensed data.
If they truly got an appropriate license agreement for every image in the training set then I have no issues with that.
>I'm under the impression that DALL-E itself used licensed data as well.
DALL-E clearly used images they did not have a license for. Early on it was able to output convincing images of Pikachu and Homer Simpson. OpenAI certainly didn’t get licensing rights for those characters.
- Filligree 3y agoThere's an argument to be made that drawing Pikachu should not be allowed, certainly. I think it's harder to make the argument that humans should be allowed to, but AI not. What ongoing litigation I'm aware of seeks to close that loophole and make fanart illegal, which would be a first step towards also preventing AI art.
- wtetzner 3y agoIn terms of copyright, I don't believe there's any issue with drawing Pikachu, unless it's an exact replica of someone else's drawing. Not sure if there would be trademark issues. But that would be the case regardless of how the image was created.
- cthalupa 3y ago> I don't believe there's any issue with drawing Pikachu In practice? No, not really. But Pikachu is a copyrighted character and only those with license to do so are actually legally allowed to reproduce Pikachu in media. Trademarks can come into play like you said, but even just base copyright allows for the ownership of characters such as Pikachu or Batman or whatever.
- zirgs 3y agoWhat about drawing Pikachu for personal use? Putting it on a wall in my apartment, for example?