3 ms·
Just because you hired artists to copy someone else's work doesn't mean your model isn't the result of copyright infringement, indeed it makes it somewhat more
by pbhjpbhj 2y ago
Just because you hired artists to copy someone else's work doesn't mean your model isn't the result of copyright infringement, indeed it makes it somewhat more obvious imo.
Maybe that would be Fair Use, but things like purpose, weak transformation (in the hired artists copies), competition against the original, and business motive would all suggest it relies on non-Fair Use copying.
I don't know why you think something that involves direct copying shouldn't be a 'hill to die on' for a copyright infringement claim?
- spywaregorilla 2y agoNot copy the work. Copy the style. Because style is not copyrightable. What I'm saying is that if you believe that your personal style is your valuable asset and choose to protect it by saying people can't train on your images; you ought to be aware that it's trivially easy to build a model that replicates your style and does not require your images.
- burnished 2y agoHiring someone for work is not trivial, though it is practical.
- spywaregorilla 2y agoIt's trivial compared to hiring a specific person