4 ms·

"Using" copyrighted material is not a copyright violation, "copying" it is. So the question is if "training" is copying, but it doesn't really seem like it is.

bdowling 4y ago
If training requires making a copy in memory, then that may be copyright infringement.
- python999 4y ago
  One way to achieve full defensibility could therefore be to train on a human mimic of the corpus?
- prepend 4y ago
  Me viewing it with my eyes involved making a copy in my neurons. Or viewing it on my television requires multiple copies as the data moves through wires and tuners and memory and storage. Obviously a video just be copied into RAM to process and display for normal viewing. Why would making a copy in memory to run through a training algorithm be different than an algorithm to encode or decode for display on a screen? I don’t think transmission should count as making copies.
  - ChatGTP 4y ago
    A distinction should be made here, you’re not a hard drive which an store perfect copies of information. So it’s not the same thing.
    - prepend 4y ago
      My machine learning system isn’t storing the material. It’s just reading it in and passing it through RAM. It’s different to store material vs stream and process.
      - ChatGTP 4y ago
        if it wasn’t storing some part of it, there’d be no way for it to produce something, it is a form of compression. Even if that’s now a taboo idea.
        CamperBob2 4y ago
        Compressing a whole song down to the equivalent of two or three bytes and playing it back in an entirely different form should be considered fair use.
  - bdowling 4y ago
    Here’s how US law defines “copies”: “Copies” are material objects, other than phonorecords, in which a work is fixed by any method now known or later developed, and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. 17 USC 101. There’s no way to look at your brain to perceive, reproduce, or communicate a work that you looked at, so under US law, your neurons are not a copy. As for decoding a video to display it on a television, yes, that process requires making copies. That is why if you don’t have a license to a work, then decoding and displaying it is copyright infringement.

bdowling 4y ago

If training requires making a copy in memory, then that may be copyright infringement.

python999 4y ago
One way to achieve full defensibility could therefore be to train on a human mimic of the corpus?
prepend 4y ago
Me viewing it with my eyes involved making a copy in my neurons. Or viewing it on my television requires multiple copies as the data moves through wires and tuners and memory and storage. Obviously a video just be copied into RAM to process and display for normal viewing. Why would making a copy in memory to run through a training algorithm be different than an algorithm to encode or decode for display on a screen? I don’t think transmission should count as making copies.
- ChatGTP 4y ago
  A distinction should be made here, you’re not a hard drive which an store perfect copies of information. So it’s not the same thing.
  - prepend 4y ago
    My machine learning system isn’t storing the material. It’s just reading it in and passing it through RAM. It’s different to store material vs stream and process.
    - ChatGTP 4y ago
      if it wasn’t storing some part of it, there’d be no way for it to produce something, it is a form of compression. Even if that’s now a taboo idea.
      - CamperBob2 4y ago
        Compressing a whole song down to the equivalent of two or three bytes and playing it back in an entirely different form should be considered fair use.
- bdowling 4y ago
  Here’s how US law defines “copies”: “Copies” are material objects, other than phonorecords, in which a work is fixed by any method now known or later developed, and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. 17 USC 101. There’s no way to look at your brain to perceive, reproduce, or communicate a work that you looked at, so under US law, your neurons are not a copy. As for decoding a video to display it on a television, yes, that process requires making copies. That is why if you don’t have a license to a work, then decoding and displaying it is copyright infringement.