2 ms·
If it is not about the transient copies, then what other step in the machine learning process could possibly rise to the level of a copyright violation? What is
by Kim_Bruning 3y ago
If it is not about the transient copies, then what other step in the machine learning process could possibly rise to the level of a copyright violation? What is your reasoning? Do you have a source?
If images/text being stored or not is not part of the argument, then what IS the argument that AI works are derivative? Is it only certain works? All works? Is it automatic? Does it require human intent? How do you get from A to B here?
- anileated 3y agoA work created this way is derivative. If it was through human mind then could be called plagiarism or tribute, but through an automatic tool ran for profit it’s a clear violation if the work was not licensed to allow derivative works. And of course there is human intent, what are you even talking about? This is law. Law is sort of centered around human actions and intent plays a big role. In this case, operators fully intended to scrape copyrighted works, feed it to this tool and operate it for profit (because money smells good).
- Kim_Bruning 3y agoYou did not answer my question. Define "derivative". Then explain why an arbitrary generated image would be a derivative according to your definition. This is not an adversarial question in and of itself. I'm just asking you to define your terms first.