3 ms·

It will be hard to use the model without reproducing (copying) it. You may consider any output of the model derivative work and then it would apply. But that g

by riedel 3y ago

It will be hard to use the model without reproducing (copying) it. You may consider any output of the model derivative work and then it would apply. But that goes against the understanding that outputs of ML models are copyrightable. If however, someone runs the model for non-commercial purpose and you take the the output of the model and commercialize it... Copyright law is broken by now IMHO.

yard2010 3y ago
Now? Copyright law is broken for decades. My 2 cents that it's part of the whole government/technology lag, lawmakers are decades behind in terms of what they know, their whole perspective is skewed
TekMol 3y ago
hard to use the model without reproducing (copying) it Can you link to a source that backs up this line of thought? It is not how I understand copyright law. AFAIK it is not about you making a copy for yourself. It is about person A copying content person B has the copyright to and then giving it to person C. That's why the license talks about "sharing". The way I understand it, what A does with their copy of the content does not fall under the copyright law.
- dumpsterdiver 3y ago
  If at any point a person chooses to "share" the work of an artist with other people outside of the marketplace where the artist is selling their work, then those people are stealing. I really don't think it's that hard to discern fair use from theft. I also don't understand why so many people rush to defend stealing software just because "it's only numbers on a computer". Stolen software is not just a number on a computer. Quality software is very expensive to produce, and when people take that software without paying for I then that contributes to bad software being produced in the future, because the quality developers you want producing your software can no longer be afforded for your bullshit, because too many of you have no problem stealing from other people.

by riedel 3y ago

yard2010 3y ago

Now? Copyright law is broken for decades. My 2 cents that it's part of the whole government/technology lag, lawmakers are decades behind in terms of what they know, their whole perspective is skewed

TekMol 3y ago

hard to use the model without reproducing (copying) it Can you link to a source that backs up this line of thought? It is not how I understand copyright law. AFAIK it is not about you making a copy for yourself. It is about person A copying content person B has the copyright to and then giving it to person C. That's why the license talks about "sharing". The way I understand it, what A does with their copy of the content does not fall under the copyright law.

dumpsterdiver 3y ago
If at any point a person chooses to "share" the work of an artist with other people outside of the marketplace where the artist is selling their work, then those people are stealing. I really don't think it's that hard to discern fair use from theft. I also don't understand why so many people rush to defend stealing software just because "it's only numbers on a computer". Stolen software is not just a number on a computer. Quality software is very expensive to produce, and when people take that software without paying for I then that contributes to bad software being produced in the future, because the quality developers you want producing your software can no longer be afforded for your bullshit, because too many of you have no problem stealing from other people.