4 ms·

> was data of original works downloaded? yep. was that data processed? yep. was some kind of output based on that data created? yep. so what is that data, if no

by stale2002 3y ago

> was data of original works downloaded? yep. was that data processed? yep. was some kind of output based on that data created? yep. so what is that data, if not a derivative? If I have a program that downloads an image, process the image, and simply returns a yes or no, single byte information, of if the image is blue or not, are you really going to call that derivative work? Because this "is it blue" program does ever single thing that you brought up here. And clearly my "is it blue" program is not derivative work.

pxoe 3y ago
program may not be, results could very much be. they are based on something. "but what does the word "derived" mean anyway" lol. i don't know, if you really don't want for those 'results' to be 'derived' from something and be a 'derivative', do a coin flip and just pick that random result.
- stale2002 3y ago
  > results could very much be. So you are actually going to argue that the one single bit of information, that says "yes or no, is this image blue" is derivative work? Really? Clearly is not. It is clearly the case that if a program outputs if an image is blue or not, with a yes or no answer, that this yes/no answer is not derivative work. You will not lose a lawsuit for outputting if an image is blue.
  - pxoe 3y ago
    do that enough times and it becomes a sizeable database. is it gonna be a derivative work then? at which size? some databases, like ones that point to and describe 'training data', are pretty much just 'saying if an image is blue'. describing what's on that image. is 'one annotation' a derivative work? is a million of them? either way, whatever's the number, it's apparently enough for those databases to put up a license on them, and regulate whether and on what terms are derivatives gonna be made of them.
    - stale2002 3y ago
      No, a data point of if an image is blue is not illegal. > it becomes a sizeable database. No judge has said this. Also, the case law actually supports me not you. What we have described here actually sound very similar to the Google court case about search indexes/ect, which was ruled not illegal. So are you just going to falsely claims that this judge is wrong and that all search indexes are illegal or something? It's clearly not. It is clearly not illegal for all of Google to exist. Search indexes are not banned worldwide. Also, I am not sure why you are even arguing about this when you previously said '"but what does the word "derived" mean anyway" lol. i don't know'. If you don't know then thats fine! You already admitted that you don't know, so stop pretending like you are confident on any of this when you are admitting that you don't know on the most important part of it.
      - pxoe 3y ago
        that's you, asking "are the results of a program that were derived from something gonna be a derivative work?". what is a derivative? what does derived even mean really, right? a program wouldn't be a derivative, results could be, and they're just derived from something. that is just gonna be the chain of processing there. and, well, "is it blue" database might not be a "derivative work" (for legal purposes). but it still could be a "work" that could be protected with a license nonetheless, huh. so, it's not a 'derivative work', but it's a 'work', and it was 'derived' from something. if you're more comfortable, it could be called 'a derived work'. not a derivative work - a very important distinction there. anyway, that example with "a hypothetical blue program" - isn't gonna map so neatly to 'an image processing program, that takes in images, and spits out images'.
        stale2002 3y ago
        > and, well, "is it blue" database might not be a "derivative work" (for legal purposes). Finally we got there! I am glad that you agree that according to the only definition that matters, in context here, is that this stuff could be completely legal! Just like search engines are legal according to existing laws, yes a blue database could be legal, and finally, so could AI models weights. I am glad that you have pulled back from basically everything here and admitted that this stuff could be fully legal. Really you could have just said that from the beginning and solved all this confusion.

pxoe 3y ago

program may not be, results could very much be. they are based on something. "but what does the word "derived" mean anyway" lol. i don't know, if you really don't want for those 'results' to be 'derived' from something and be a 'derivative', do a coin flip and just pick that random result.

stale2002 3y ago
> results could very much be. So you are actually going to argue that the one single bit of information, that says "yes or no, is this image blue" is derivative work? Really? Clearly is not. It is clearly the case that if a program outputs if an image is blue or not, with a yes or no answer, that this yes/no answer is not derivative work. You will not lose a lawsuit for outputting if an image is blue.
- pxoe 3y ago
  do that enough times and it becomes a sizeable database. is it gonna be a derivative work then? at which size? some databases, like ones that point to and describe 'training data', are pretty much just 'saying if an image is blue'. describing what's on that image. is 'one annotation' a derivative work? is a million of them? either way, whatever's the number, it's apparently enough for those databases to put up a license on them, and regulate whether and on what terms are derivatives gonna be made of them.
  - stale2002 3y ago
    No, a data point of if an image is blue is not illegal. > it becomes a sizeable database. No judge has said this. Also, the case law actually supports me not you. What we have described here actually sound very similar to the Google court case about search indexes/ect, which was ruled not illegal. So are you just going to falsely claims that this judge is wrong and that all search indexes are illegal or something? It's clearly not. It is clearly not illegal for all of Google to exist. Search indexes are not banned worldwide. Also, I am not sure why you are even arguing about this when you previously said '"but what does the word "derived" mean anyway" lol. i don't know'. If you don't know then thats fine! You already admitted that you don't know, so stop pretending like you are confident on any of this when you are admitting that you don't know on the most important part of it.
    - pxoe 3y ago
      that's you, asking "are the results of a program that were derived from something gonna be a derivative work?". what is a derivative? what does derived even mean really, right? a program wouldn't be a derivative, results could be, and they're just derived from something. that is just gonna be the chain of processing there. and, well, "is it blue" database might not be a "derivative work" (for legal purposes). but it still could be a "work" that could be protected with a license nonetheless, huh. so, it's not a 'derivative work', but it's a 'work', and it was 'derived' from something. if you're more comfortable, it could be called 'a derived work'. not a derivative work - a very important distinction there. anyway, that example with "a hypothetical blue program" - isn't gonna map so neatly to 'an image processing program, that takes in images, and spits out images'.
      - stale2002 3y ago
        > and, well, "is it blue" database might not be a "derivative work" (for legal purposes). Finally we got there! I am glad that you agree that according to the only definition that matters, in context here, is that this stuff could be completely legal! Just like search engines are legal according to existing laws, yes a blue database could be legal, and finally, so could AI models weights. I am glad that you have pulled back from basically everything here and admitted that this stuff could be fully legal. Really you could have just said that from the beginning and solved all this confusion.