30 ms·
> 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
by 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 agosure! except, well, it's still a derivative work. even within those that end up at 'well, for "legal purposes" and in some settled case, it isn't' - it still got called a derivative work and was considered as such, by people who filed a lawsuit, etc. and it might continue to get called that, unfortunately lol. those cases - might not translate into some kind of 'decision' about other kinds of derivatives. some kind of database, or training datasets (with multiple parameters, descriptions, etc.), or models, or AI output - are all gonna be different, unfortunately. not as much of a smooth sailing there, I'm afraid. and some random "search engine" case that keeps getting alluded to, isn't gonna map to those things as neatly, let alone all of them in that cute daisy-chaned manner. hell, google with their newer AI search tricks, like bard and generative answers - might only be yet to find out whether that checks out legally or not.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]