3 ms·
It is the equivalent of making a 3D map of a museum and getting sued by one artist of one painting in the museum. Ant individual work in an AI dataset is nearly
by lubujackson 3y ago
It is the equivalent of making a 3D map of a museum and getting sued by one artist of one painting in the museum. Ant individual work in an AI dataset is nearly worthless - only in aggregate does it have value.
If that doesn't count as a "transformative work" I don't know what does.
- thebears5454 3y agoThey could literally just repeat a Silverman routine verbatim
- JoshTriplett 3y ago> It is the equivalent of making a 3D map of a museum and getting sued by one artist of one painting in the museum. If the painting is copyrighted (rather than public domain, as many pieces in museums are), and the map includes an image of that painting, I would expect that to be prohibited. I would prefer the world in which copyright doesn't exist, but while it exists, it should apply to everyone equally.
- skeaker 3y agoSure, but your analogy fails there since it implies that the map contains the entire original work. AI models do not contain the entire original works of their training data. If they did they would be the most efficient storage methods ever devised. All those terabytes of training data can obviously not be squished 1 for 1 into the model that is only a couple of gigabytes at the higher end.
- JoshTriplett 3y agoThe AI models can, in many cases, reproduce large portions of the training data verbatim. (Some models have controls on top preventing this, but the underlying model has the data.) And even if they can't reproduce the entire work, they're still derivative works of the training data.