3 ms·

That's a difficult question because the boundaries of similarity/derived works for copyright purposes are determined by judges and juries based on their intuiti

That's a difficult question because the boundaries of similarity/derived works for copyright purposes are determined by judges and juries based on their intuitions. There's no mathematical similarity testing, and trying to formulate such a thing would be challenging. What's similar enough to a pop music theme, that has a grand total of a few lines of unique music, to be a copyright violation? How many bars have to be copied, and what kinds of minor variances do or don't avoid a violation? If you're inspired by a haiku, and change 5 of 17 syllables, is that still a copyright violation? Who knows.

raincole 3y ago
> That's a difficult question because the boundaries of similarity/derived works for copyright purposes are determined by judges and juries based on their intuitions. I believe that's why DALL-E bans some keywords related to alive artists. To show they have "no intention to violate copyrights". And that's why I'm so worry about that we're heading to a future where open, uncensored models are illegal and closed source AI-as-a-service services are legal. It's not fearmongering: right now, you can't use GPL code in your closed source apps, but you can use GPL code on your server running a service that provides the exact same functions. I believe it has already hugely undermined the original intent of GPL (written in an era before SaaS became popular). Some AI proponents say ML is the biggest invention since steam machines. I don't know if it's true, but if we end up stuck in a situation where open models are illegal while AI-as-a-service is legal, then it's the biggest step toward a dystopia since steam machines.