3 ms·
Sincere question: Do we need new laws for this? If I use photoshop to create a straight reproduction of an artwork by someone else and monetize it, copyright l
by pj_mukh 1y ago
Sincere question: Do we need new laws for this?
If I use photoshop to create a straight reproduction of an artwork by someone else and monetize it, copyright law handles this.
If I use AI to do the same, same deal? At no point did someone suggest suing Adobe for building photoshop for "enabling" people to recreate art and sell it.
So what changed? The ease of use?
- birn559 1y agoAI uses lossy compression of data to generate output that is potentially a copyright violation. Photoshop doesn't recommend a (mostly) straight reproduction of existing work, but an AI potentially does.
- pj_mukh 1y ago“Photoshop doesn't recommend” Neither does OpenAI? What about an empty chat prompt “encourages” copyright abuse?
- const_cast 1y agoThe express and sole purpose of an LLM is to create output that can be found in it's input. That's what it does. When you ask for a picture of a cup of wine, you're reproducing an image of a cup of wine that was using in training. Or, more accurately, hundreds of images sort of averaged together. You can't say this isn't the intention because this is literally the singular use of LLM. They don't do anything else. They don't change your oil. They reproduce input. Just because you don't know exactly what the input was originally (and you, in fact, cannot find out) does not mean that isn't what it's doing.