4 ms·
> This is what Silicon Valley doesn't understand: The concept of Consent. This is what you don't understand: the concept of fair use. https://en.wikipedia.org
by Turing_Machine 3y ago
> This is what Silicon Valley doesn't understand: The concept of Consent.
This is what you don't understand: the concept of fair use.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
If the courts hold this type of thing to be fair use (which I'm about 90% sure they will), "consent" won't enter into it. At all.
- rvz 3y agoThere is nothing "fair use" around this: [0] or this [1] which both cases are done without permission and are commercial uses. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/17/23558516/ai-art-copyright-stable-diffusion-getty-images-lawsuit https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/17/23558516/ai-art-copyright... [1] https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/scarlett-johansson-legal-action-ai-app-ad-likeness-1235773489/ https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/scarlett-johansson-leg...
- Turing_Machine 3y agoYour first reference is an opinion of the lawyers for a concerned party, i.e., meaningless. Lawyers make nonsensical claims all the time. It's one of the things they get paid for. The situation described in your second reference is already unlawful, regardless of how the image was produced. You're not allowed to make commercial use of images of Scarlett Johansson even if you scratch them on a cave wall with a broken deer antler.