5 ms·

Yeah, there really needs to be a solution to situations like this honestly.

esafak 3y ago
It's called paying copyright owners -- artists. The economic model can be worked out, but it's not the status quo, where software companies take all the profit and artists are left with nothing.
- brigadier132 3y ago
  Amazing how everyone is an intellectual property zealot now.
  - NewJazz 3y ago
    Yeah I would also point out... If copyright terms were shorter, perhaps people would be less tempted to hoover up modern artists' and writers' works.
  - DFHippie 3y ago
    Maybe because it's more relevant? If you see one artist being ripped off, it's sad, but it's an outlier. When you see the entire sector being ripped off, you start paying attention. It helps if you care about the people being ripped off, which most people are capable of, having an instinct for empathy.
  - CaptainFever 3y ago
    Yeah. "Copyright for me but not for thee". Yes I'm aware that applies to commercial AI too -- use open models.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
homefree 3y ago
Arguably there is - training is not a copyright violation imo. I think it's more akin to you viewing the art and then later making your own thing, you get an intuition/inspiration from what you've seen. The other complaints are mostly about how it has become hard to not share to social media, but that's mostly a complaint about how people are. He can still just post on a website, it's not really the fault of social media companies that people prefer that.
- ParetoOptimal 3y ago
  Its not like looking and getting inspiration, its looking and being able to almost perfectly duplicate the style. Their complaint is not being able to post art for its own sake because it will be hoovered up into datasets to train more AI: They are forced to submit to helping train AI or not post their art.
  - boolemancer 3y ago
    > Its not like looking and getting inspiration, its looking and being able to almost perfectly duplicate the style. You cannot copyright a style. A person is perfectly within their right to copy your art style when they produce their own work. So, I think "duplicate the style of" and "taking inspiration from" are the same thing in this context.
  - Workaccount2 3y ago
    Most skilled artists are perfectly capable of generating near identical copies of other artists work. This is something that has been going on for millennia.
    - ParetoOptimal 3y ago
      That's different though because there are social and legal reasons not to do it. Also, the pool of people that can imitate a skilled artist is much smaller than those who can prompt "in the style of Picasso...".

It's called paying copyright owners -- artists. The economic model can be worked out, but it's not the status quo, where software companies take all the profit and artists are left with nothing.

brigadier132 3y ago
Amazing how everyone is an intellectual property zealot now.
- NewJazz 3y ago
  Yeah I would also point out... If copyright terms were shorter, perhaps people would be less tempted to hoover up modern artists' and writers' works.
- DFHippie 3y ago
  Maybe because it's more relevant? If you see one artist being ripped off, it's sad, but it's an outlier. When you see the entire sector being ripped off, you start paying attention. It helps if you care about the people being ripped off, which most people are capable of, having an instinct for empathy.
- CaptainFever 3y ago
  Yeah. "Copyright for me but not for thee". Yes I'm aware that applies to commercial AI too -- use open models.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

homefree 3y ago

Arguably there is - training is not a copyright violation imo. I think it's more akin to you viewing the art and then later making your own thing, you get an intuition/inspiration from what you've seen. The other complaints are mostly about how it has become hard to not share to social media, but that's mostly a complaint about how people are. He can still just post on a website, it's not really the fault of social media companies that people prefer that.

ParetoOptimal 3y ago
Its not like looking and getting inspiration, its looking and being able to almost perfectly duplicate the style. Their complaint is not being able to post art for its own sake because it will be hoovered up into datasets to train more AI: They are forced to submit to helping train AI or not post their art.
- boolemancer 3y ago
  > Its not like looking and getting inspiration, its looking and being able to almost perfectly duplicate the style. You cannot copyright a style. A person is perfectly within their right to copy your art style when they produce their own work. So, I think "duplicate the style of" and "taking inspiration from" are the same thing in this context.
- Workaccount2 3y ago
  Most skilled artists are perfectly capable of generating near identical copies of other artists work. This is something that has been going on for millennia.
  - ParetoOptimal 3y ago
    That's different though because there are social and legal reasons not to do it. Also, the pool of people that can imitate a skilled artist is much smaller than those who can prompt "in the style of Picasso...".