4 ms·
People aren't going to get it, because you don't get them. People have the right to learn non-copyrightable elements from your code. The claim is that AI lear
by ADeerAppeared 2y ago
People aren't going to get it, because you don't get them.
People have the right to learn non-copyrightable elements from your code.
The claim is that AI learns copyrightable elements.
- archontes 2y agoThe comment chain you are replying to includes a request to not train an AI on one's code. I agree it's certainly possible for AI to produce infringing output. Nevertheless, people don't have the right to enforce a limitation on training.
- warkdarrior 2y agoAnd to give a concrete example, in my view it should be allowed to use any source code to train a model such that the model learns that code is bad or insecure or slow or otherwise undesirable. In other words, it should be allowed to train on anything as long as the model does NOT produce that training data verbatim.
- archontes 2y agoMaybe you should update your view with 17 USC 106. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106
- LegionMammal978 2y agoWhat copyrightable elements of the original work persist in the model, if it is incapable of outputting them? I can derive a SHA-1 hash from a copyrighted image, and yet it would be absurd to call that a derivative work.