3 ms·
This is a fine question to ask, but it's far from dispositive. Even if human minds were, functionally, no different from computers (a philosophical question), t
by anon373839 2y ago
This is a fine question to ask, but it's far from dispositive. Even if human minds were, functionally, no different from computers (a philosophical question), there would still remain the question: should the law treat humans differently than it treats machines? And many other questions, I'm sure.
- stubish 2y agoIts more my summary of the case. I'm not sure if this needs to devolve into machine rights though. If you treat the computer just like a tool, then it comes down to is it ok to mimic an artist using raw talent, but not using technology like samplers or vocal modulation? Does intent matter? It would suck if naturally sounding like Robert Plant was not a blessing but a curse. Personally, I think the law is going to decide that you can't make the tool by feeding it copyrighted material without permission. And maybe go further by requiring permission of the performers (who may not be the copyright holders, say in the other high profile case of mimicking Hollywood actors, or just public domain material or bootleg recordings). Not sure what will happen to ownership of material generated by such a tool though. Or if you can make these tools in the privacy of your own home. I think the law already treats humans different to some machines, such as photocopiers or VHS recorders.