3 ms·

> The model contains a copy of the work, and you can't distribute or publish your model without violating copyright. Does it? And if it did, why wouldn't fair

> The model contains a copy of the work, and you can't distribute or publish your model without violating copyright. Does it? And if it did, why wouldn't fair use apply here as much as it would apply to the actual training/SaaS offering?

stubish 3y ago
How is distributing a model containing copyright material any different to distributing a .zip file containing copyright material? Both contain an encoded, transformed copy of the work. And both can be used to reproduce the original work. The reproduction doesn't even need to be verbatim; just similar enough to convince a court that it is plagiarism. Fair use generally only applies for parts of a work, and not using the entire thing. AI companies are claiming fair use, claiming that the processing is transformative. This needs to be determined in court. I think the court cases currently underway will show it is not transformative, because the original work can be recovered. Fair use is also determined on a case by case basis, so I think courts won't have the power to grant blanket permission. New laws would need to be passed for that.
- EMIRELADERO 3y ago
  > How is distributing a model containing copyright material any different to distributing a .zip file containing copyright material? Both contain an encoded, transformed copy of the work. And both can be used to reproduce the original work. The reproduction doesn't even need to be verbatim; just similar enough to convince a court that it is plagiarism. Because of the substantial non-infringing uses. A court wouldn't throw away a model that can do non-infringing stuff 90% of the time if it can infringe copyright the other 10%. > Fair use generally only applies for parts of a work, and not using the entire thing. AI companies are claiming fair use, claiming that the processing is transformative. This needs to be determined in court. I think the court cases currently underway will show it is not transformative, because the original work can be recovered. Fair use is also determined on a case by case basis, so I think courts won't have the power to grant blanket permission. New laws would need to be passed for that. Fair use can apply to any possible allegation of infringement, not just parts of a work, as long as courts find the facts are in favor of it. Whiile fair use is a case-by-case thing, courts can set precedent that will apply to all situations with similar fact patterns.
- fragmede 3y ago
  There's a paper on this, and it's fairly convincing that they're able to plagiarize https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/midjourney-copyright-2666872100 https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/midjourney-copyright-266687210...

stubish 3y ago

How is distributing a model containing copyright material any different to distributing a .zip file containing copyright material? Both contain an encoded, transformed copy of the work. And both can be used to reproduce the original work. The reproduction doesn't even need to be verbatim; just similar enough to convince a court that it is plagiarism. Fair use generally only applies for parts of a work, and not using the entire thing. AI companies are claiming fair use, claiming that the processing is transformative. This needs to be determined in court. I think the court cases currently underway will show it is not transformative, because the original work can be recovered. Fair use is also determined on a case by case basis, so I think courts won't have the power to grant blanket permission. New laws would need to be passed for that.

EMIRELADERO 3y ago
> How is distributing a model containing copyright material any different to distributing a .zip file containing copyright material? Both contain an encoded, transformed copy of the work. And both can be used to reproduce the original work. The reproduction doesn't even need to be verbatim; just similar enough to convince a court that it is plagiarism. Because of the substantial non-infringing uses. A court wouldn't throw away a model that can do non-infringing stuff 90% of the time if it can infringe copyright the other 10%. > Fair use generally only applies for parts of a work, and not using the entire thing. AI companies are claiming fair use, claiming that the processing is transformative. This needs to be determined in court. I think the court cases currently underway will show it is not transformative, because the original work can be recovered. Fair use is also determined on a case by case basis, so I think courts won't have the power to grant blanket permission. New laws would need to be passed for that. Fair use can apply to any possible allegation of infringement, not just parts of a work, as long as courts find the facts are in favor of it. Whiile fair use is a case-by-case thing, courts can set precedent that will apply to all situations with similar fact patterns.
fragmede 3y ago
There's a paper on this, and it's fairly convincing that they're able to plagiarize https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/midjourney-copyright-2666872100 https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/midjourney-copyright-266687210...