3 ms·

This for me does not make sense as a copyright violation. It’s like saying that Adobe is in trouble because you drew something infringing in Photoshop. If you p

This for me does not make sense as a copyright violation. It’s like saying that Adobe is in trouble because you drew something infringing in Photoshop. If you prompt the model with the intention of creating something infringing by mentioning the name of the characters and the work, and you get something infringing out, then it’s you who have infringed the copyright, not the maker of the tool.

Lorak_ 3y ago
Did you read the article? It shows a lot of examples when no specific names are mentioned, or even with very generic prompts producing copyrighted material.
- rolisz 3y ago
  Oh c'mon, those prompts were not generic. Italian plumbers? How many other Italian plumbers do you know? What's the most popular soda in a red can?
  - CatWChainsaw 3y ago
    "futuristic robot"?
Alifatisk 3y ago
> If you prompt the model with the intention of creating something infringing by mentioning the name of the characters and the work, and you get something infringing out, then it’s you who have infringed the copyright, not the maker of the tool. Yeah but that is not the case, they never mentioned Mario and Luigi, yet, that's what the output turned out to be.
techdmn 3y ago
This is an interesting idea. I assume that while the protected material would be obvious in some case, in many it would not. Would the tool have to be able to identify (and properly attribute) copyrighted material in its output?
Xeamek 3y ago
The post shows many examples where the prompt explicitly avoids any mentions of copyrighted materials but the generated results includes them regardless. Did you even read the post? But also, the argument of 'user responsibility' doesn't hold up on its own regardless (imo). If I make and sell a toy printer that can only ever produce 3 pictures, and all of them contains copyright materials, would you really say that it's fine and responsibility falls under the end user? And I could sell that printer without any issues?
Uvix 3y ago
What about when you prompt the model without the intention of creating something infringing, and still get those same characters out in the result?
mattmanser 3y ago
The user didn't create it, the cloud-hosted machine owned by OpenAI, that charges for access, did. When prompted with 'futuristic robot' and 'italian plumbers'. So the argument is that if openAI had not used copyrighted and trademarked source material, this wouldn't be happening. It's not transformative as it's reproducing these copyrighted materials and trademarks verbatim. That's how it makes sense.
fzeroracer 3y ago
No, it's more akin to if Photoshop had a 'Mario' stamp which when used would stamp a random piece of Mario artwork from the games. Do you think this would be in violation of copyright?

Lorak_ 3y ago

Did you read the article? It shows a lot of examples when no specific names are mentioned, or even with very generic prompts producing copyrighted material.

rolisz 3y ago
Oh c'mon, those prompts were not generic. Italian plumbers? How many other Italian plumbers do you know? What's the most popular soda in a red can?
- CatWChainsaw 3y ago
  "futuristic robot"?

Alifatisk 3y ago

> If you prompt the model with the intention of creating something infringing by mentioning the name of the characters and the work, and you get something infringing out, then it’s you who have infringed the copyright, not the maker of the tool. Yeah but that is not the case, they never mentioned Mario and Luigi, yet, that's what the output turned out to be.

techdmn 3y ago

This is an interesting idea. I assume that while the protected material would be obvious in some case, in many it would not. Would the tool have to be able to identify (and properly attribute) copyrighted material in its output?

Xeamek 3y ago

The post shows many examples where the prompt explicitly avoids any mentions of copyrighted materials but the generated results includes them regardless. Did you even read the post? But also, the argument of 'user responsibility' doesn't hold up on its own regardless (imo). If I make and sell a toy printer that can only ever produce 3 pictures, and all of them contains copyright materials, would you really say that it's fine and responsibility falls under the end user? And I could sell that printer without any issues?

Uvix 3y ago

What about when you prompt the model without the intention of creating something infringing, and still get those same characters out in the result?

mattmanser 3y ago

The user didn't create it, the cloud-hosted machine owned by OpenAI, that charges for access, did. When prompted with 'futuristic robot' and 'italian plumbers'. So the argument is that if openAI had not used copyrighted and trademarked source material, this wouldn't be happening. It's not transformative as it's reproducing these copyrighted materials and trademarks verbatim. That's how it makes sense.

fzeroracer 3y ago

No, it's more akin to if Photoshop had a 'Mario' stamp which when used would stamp a random piece of Mario artwork from the games. Do you think this would be in violation of copyright?