5 ms·
That is how copyright works. If you put something in public, people are allowed to look at it. And learn from it. They just can’t distribute copies of it.
by fauxpause_ 3y ago
That is how copyright works. If you put something in public, people are allowed to look at it. And learn from it. They just can’t distribute copies of it.
- polotics 3y agoPeople are allowed to learn from it, but as far as law exists now, AI's are not explicitly allowed to learn from it are they? As I understand it, a copyright has to be explicitly granted.
- Kim_Bruning 3y agoreference?
- fauxpause_ 3y agoLaws don’t grant rights. They take them away. You generally are allowed to do something if it doesn’t violate a law. “Copyright” is not the right to copy, but rather a protection against other people copying and distributing your work. There is no law that says you cannot train AI models on copyrighted data.
- polotics 3y agoYou don't train a model with data, as the verb "train" is used to describe something that humans and animals do (as per dictionary definition of the word). The other thing that you can do with data is copy or destroy it. Therefore, there is a law that says you cannot "train" (really, copy) data that is under copyright.
- fauxpause_ 3y agoTrain is an accurate word. Copy is not. Training is literally adjusting weights of network such that data that flows through it can look more like the original. But it doesn’t preserve the original. Also, It is legal to make copies of copyrighted materials so long as you don’t distribute them.
- polotics 3y agoTrain is not accurate because this word applies to learning performed by humans or animals. An AI is neither. Taking data and putting it into any form of storage, ie weights in a model, is called copying. Producing an output out of the gathered data is then a step in distribution. Copyright laws ensure authors get protection against unwanted copy and distribution. Also you do not have to preserve the original for copyright to apply: any extract is only allowed under well defined fair use rules. A GAN's purpose is definitely not parody, commentary, ...
- fauxpause_ 3y ago> Train is not accurate because this word applies to learning performed by humans or animals. An AI is neither. That is not a definition that people use, nor the legal system > Taking data and putting it into any form of storage, ie weights in a model, is called copying. Producing an output out of the gathered data is then a step in distribution. It isn’t though. If I train on Batman and I produce Spider-Man, the Batman copyright holder cannot sue me. It would be dumb to suggest otherwise.
- polotics 3y agoVery interesting to see that every single one of my posts on this have been downvoted, clearly the stakes are high. This will see its day in court, and clearly indeed the meaning of the verb "train" will feature prominently in the debate. I tend to side with reliance on dictionaries for the meaning of words, and in my understanding the courts also do. If you load up only batman pictures on your model you will clearly only produce batman pictures. No one is being dumb here that does not want to be, I am sorry.
- zamnos 3y agoThe courts have their own dictionaries though, so it depends on which court in which case you're talking about. Here's a list of definitions for how the (US) courts define the word software. https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/software https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/software