8 ms·

So I’m responsible for pushing the giant boulder at the top of the hill. The humans at the bottom who were crushed should blame the boulder, which happened to

So I’m responsible for pushing the giant boulder at the top of the hill. The humans at the bottom who were crushed should blame the boulder, which happened to be moving.

jacquesm 6mo ago
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.
- Aerroon 6mo ago
  He's making a point about responsibility/liability. If you only get copyright for the prompt you make, but not the output, then it's like being responsible only for the prompt, but not the output. Ie he's only responsible for pushing the boulder up the hill. The fact that it rolled down from the hill and crushed someone's house "isn't his fault" (he doesn't get copyright on it).
  - jacquesm 6mo ago
    Well, you are responsible for the consequences. Liability is simply a different thing than copyright.
    - Aerroon 6mo ago
      The copyright office says that you don't get copyright because you're not considered the author: https://www.copyright.gov/ai/ https://www.copyright.gov/ai/ >The Office concludes that, given current generally available technology, prompts alone do not provide sufficient human control to make users of an AI system the authors of the output. Prompts essentially function as instructions that convey unprotectible ideas. While highly detailed prompts could contain the user’s desired expressive elements, at present they do not control how the AI system processes them in generating the output. If you're not the author then why would you have to be liable for it?
      - teddyh 6mo ago
        If you hold an illegal party on public land, you would still be liable, even though you did not own the land.
        jacquesm 6mo ago
        In some places simply not keeping the public street in front of property ice-free can incur liability, even when you are not actually there when it snows. There are so many such examples I'm kind of surprised to see this kind of confused argument made here.
        Aerroon 6mo ago
        But that's not at all a comparable situation though, because it is your party. It doesn't matter where it is, we assign "ownership" of the party to you. Even the language we use explicitly states that. In the case of copyright, we explicitly states (by the copyright office), that you are not the author of an AI generated work. Same point goes to if an animal takes a picture.
      - jacquesm 6mo ago
        > If you're not the author then why would you have to be liable for it? If you do not understand this make sure that you always operate within a framework of people who do because this soft of misunderstanding can cause you a world of grief. Because you are the person shipping it, and as such regular liability applies. If I'm not the author of a book, and make a lot of copies and distribute those I'm liable for the content of that book, regardless of whether or not I hold the copyright to it. Conversely, if the original author sues because they feel their work infringes then that too is a liability that stems from the distribution. And 'distribution' is a pretty wide term, not unlike 'interstate commerce', lots of things that you might not consider to be distribution can be classified as such in court. Different laws do not come in packages, they apply individually, and sometimes they apply collectively but it isn't a menu where you can pick the combination that you think makes the most sense.
        Aerroon 6mo ago
  - generic92034 6mo ago
    That is not how responsibility works anywhere. If you are stealing a gun and murder someone with that gun, you are still responsible, even if it is not your gun.

So I’m responsible for pushing the giant boulder at the top of the hill. The humans at the bottom who were crushed should blame the boulder, which happened to be moving.

jacquesm 6mo ago

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make.

Aerroon 6mo ago
He's making a point about responsibility/liability. If you only get copyright for the prompt you make, but not the output, then it's like being responsible only for the prompt, but not the output. Ie he's only responsible for pushing the boulder up the hill. The fact that it rolled down from the hill and crushed someone's house "isn't his fault" (he doesn't get copyright on it).
- jacquesm 6mo ago
  Well, you are responsible for the consequences. Liability is simply a different thing than copyright.
  - Aerroon 6mo ago
    The copyright office says that you don't get copyright because you're not considered the author: https://www.copyright.gov/ai/ https://www.copyright.gov/ai/ >The Office concludes that, given current generally available technology, prompts alone do not provide sufficient human control to make users of an AI system the authors of the output. Prompts essentially function as instructions that convey unprotectible ideas. While highly detailed prompts could contain the user’s desired expressive elements, at present they do not control how the AI system processes them in generating the output. If you're not the author then why would you have to be liable for it?
    - teddyh 6mo ago
      If you hold an illegal party on public land, you would still be liable, even though you did not own the land.
      - jacquesm 6mo ago
        In some places simply not keeping the public street in front of property ice-free can incur liability, even when you are not actually there when it snows. There are so many such examples I'm kind of surprised to see this kind of confused argument made here.
      - Aerroon 6mo ago
        But that's not at all a comparable situation though, because it is your party. It doesn't matter where it is, we assign "ownership" of the party to you. Even the language we use explicitly states that. In the case of copyright, we explicitly states (by the copyright office), that you are not the author of an AI generated work. Same point goes to if an animal takes a picture.
    - jacquesm 6mo ago
      > If you're not the author then why would you have to be liable for it? If you do not understand this make sure that you always operate within a framework of people who do because this soft of misunderstanding can cause you a world of grief. Because you are the person shipping it, and as such regular liability applies. If I'm not the author of a book, and make a lot of copies and distribute those I'm liable for the content of that book, regardless of whether or not I hold the copyright to it. Conversely, if the original author sues because they feel their work infringes then that too is a liability that stems from the distribution. And 'distribution' is a pretty wide term, not unlike 'interstate commerce', lots of things that you might not consider to be distribution can be classified as such in court. Different laws do not come in packages, they apply individually, and sometimes they apply collectively but it isn't a menu where you can pick the combination that you think makes the most sense.
      - Aerroon 6mo ago
- generic92034 6mo ago
  That is not how responsibility works anywhere. If you are stealing a gun and murder someone with that gun, you are still responsible, even if it is not your gun.