7 ms·

If an individual trains a model on their own data to embody their own skills and behaviour, so that they can then sell/rent that model out to work on their beha

by tensor 3y ago

If an individual trains a model on their own data to embody their own skills and behaviour, so that they can then sell/rent that model out to work on their behalf, well in that scenario not being able to treat the weights as intellectual property (copyright or otherwise controllable by a license), would be a huge violation and detrimental to that individual. I think it would be a shame to try to build legislation around the notion of the sass melting pot application of machine learning and in the process destroy all sorts of other use cases.

js8 3y ago
> If an individual trains a model on their own data to embody their own skills and behaviour, so that they can then sell/rent that model out to work on their behalf No, because we already do not treat all work as copyrightable. A plumber doesn't get copyright on his piping job. It has to be original enough. So while your own skill might be original enough to warrant copyright, distilling it into a model might not.
- tensor 3y ago
  An artists work is copyrightable, a writers work is copyrightable, an a personal model could reproduce those and also produce new works in the same style. Also, data can be intellectual property without being copyrightable.
  - js8 3y ago
    > an a personal model could reproduce those and also produce new works in the same style Yes. So it's like creating a machine that can create art. Perhaps it shouldn't be copyrightable, but patentable. I think I would be OK with ML models (weights) being patentable rather than copyrightable.