3 ms·
It would be more like abetting copyright infringement by making it easier for scrappers to find content to train their models on. LAION isn’t posting a single l
by Riverheart 3y ago
It would be more like abetting copyright infringement by making it easier for scrappers to find content to train their models on. LAION isn’t posting a single link on their twitter account for their followers. It’s clear what this dataset is being used for.
Artists put content on the internet so you can look at it and share it with your friends and say “wow cool art” not so you can run it through an art generating model to put them out of job. That we never anticipated this possibility means you call fallback on the “fair use” argument but legal does not mean ethical, especially when the law has yet to catch up to changing times.
- srslack 3y agoThat assumes that using copyrighted works to train AI is copyright infringement. And that simply pasting a link to a publicly available file that the artist themselves made available is "abetting." I'm betting that using copyrighted works to train "AI" is fair use, just like a human learning from a photo would be fair use.
- Riverheart 3y agoYou’re right, I can’t claim that it is. I understand that the models do not contain the original work. But they are not simply sharing a single link and the “intent” is different. I personally feel that we should not treat human learning and AI learning the same. Unlike humans, the AI is essentially immortal and infinitely copiable.