I created this video after being spammed by artist groups claiming that Generative AI uses copied samples to create work.

    • markendsley@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      With something like GPT sure it happens, but humans also do this when writing all the time.

      • ieatpillowtags@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        “Humans do it too”, and “yeah but it’s not intentional” are not counters to the claim that ai can infringe copyright.

      • markendsley@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        To add to that, I consider this to be unintentional plagiarism. As someone who is about to finish a Masters degree it is no mystery that two humans can come up with the same thing. This can constitute copyright infringement, but it is far from theft.

  • markendsley@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Many are spreading misinformation that Generative AI art is akin to copyright infringement. While this is still being disputed legally, the technical answer is no. AI works much like the creative part of our brain, getting ideas from things it has witnessed, and creating works of it’s own based on that.

    • markendsley@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Many are spreading misinformation that Generative AI art is akin to copyright infringement. While this is still being disputed legally, the technical answer is no. AI works much like the creative part of our brain, getting ideas from things it has witnessed, and creating works of it’s own based on that.

        • markendsley@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          The person that created the content does, but there is nothing wrong with basing your work on things other people have made, that you have witnessed.

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            but there is nothing wrong with basing your work on things other people have made, that you have witnessed.

            Without paying them for their content first?

            Or at the very least get their permission first?

            Would the AI model creators pay back some of their profits to the people that created the content that they program their models from, after the fact?

            It really comes down to at what point does your content become public domain. IANAL, so I have no idea what the legalities on that is.

            But as someone who creates content in a very very very small manner, I would like to be compensated for it, if it’s used for commercial purposes.

            Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

            • markendsley@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I don’t agree there Cosmic. Take music for instance, a lot of artist inspiration comes from what they listened to on the Radio. I know very few artists that have called up all of the bands they listened to on the radio to get permission to make their own work.

              If you make your music free to listen to in any way that opens you up to others being inspired by you.

              • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                I don’t agree there Cosmic. Take music for instance, a lot of artist inspiration comes from what they listened to on the Radio. I know very few artists that have called up all of the bands they listened to on the radio to get permission to make their own work.

                Don’t mean to be argumentative, but I think you chose a poor example to try to prove your point.

                Artists get sued all the time for infringement, when they base their song too closely off of another artists song/content.

                IANAL, and I’m guessing neither are you, but I don’t think you can just say five seconds after somebody creates content it’s free and in the public domain for anyone else to use. Everything I do understand about the law today goes against that philosophy.

                There’s usually a period of time (one which Disney tends to stretch to an absurd factor) before private content becomes public domain.

                Finally, don’t get me wrong, I do think content should go into the public domain sooner rather than later.

                But I also do know that if big corporations are going to become very very rich off of someone else’s content, that those other people should be rewarded monetarily for that content, so they can share in their success of the sold product that the content was generated from.

                Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

                • markendsley@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I think I see the disconnect here. I don’t feel that the art/work in question has to be in the public domain to be fair game for inspiration. It is the artists choice how they want to distribute their material. I see no need to differentiate between human inspiration and AI inspiration.

                  If an artist wanted to prevent either humans or AI from being inspired without paying them, they should put their content behind a paywall.

                  I feel that copyright should apply to copying material, not learning from it to make your own. In reality the law does allow for you to file for infringement just based on the work being similar, regardless of if the person being accused of infringement has ever even witnessed the source material. I see this as just fundamental flaw in the system, that has existed before AI ever came about.

        • voracitude@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          As someone who just popped into the thread, is it okay if I ask who owns the content/data that you have viewed and learned from your entire life?

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            As someone who just popped into the thread, is it okay if I ask who owns the content/data that you have viewed and learned from your entire life?

            The people who had created the content, of course.

            They gave their content to me to be entertained by and/or to learn from, after I paid them for it, or watched commercials for it, or for free.

            Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

            • Cogency@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Most of our learning is done before we can even enter into a contract, before we are an adult. So no, you didn’t pay for all of your knowledge, schools provided by your neighbors did a ton of that. Most of it was society coming together communally and supporting you with our collective shoulders of knowledge.

              • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                Most of our learning is done before we can even enter into a contract, before we are an adult. So no you didn’t pay for all of your knowledge.

                I never said I paid for all of my knowledge…

                after I paid them for it, or watched commercials for it, or for free.

                Also, I was watching commercials since I was a child, so I was returning the barter for the content being displayed to me.

                Most of it was society coming together communally and supporting you with our collective shoulders of knowledge.

                That too.

                Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)