We Asked A.I. to Create the Joker. It Generated a Copyrighted Image.::Artists and researchers are exposing copyrighted material hidden within A.I. tools, raising fresh legal questions.

  • Schmidtster@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    I mean anyone can use copyrighted material as inspiration for their work and it’s fair use and not a concern at all.

    Is Ai only bad since it can do what a human does better/faster? If that’s that case, than they don’t actually have an issue with the fact it’s copyrighted, or I wouldn’t be able to use it for inspiration either.

    • Match!!@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      In these cases it’s bad because it can do what a human does with no ethics, empathy, or regard for the law. If it had those things, it would be worse because we’d then be encroaching on the rights of sentient beings.

      • Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Problem is the AI didn’t do anything. People told the program tongo scrape the internet. So humans still made the decision with no regard doe the laws.

    • dragontamer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Is Ai only bad since it can do what a human does better/faster?

      Legally speaking, AI is not anything. Its just a computer program. What you’re asking is completely a red-herring.

      The question here is if the training-weights constitute copyright infringement. Now look at any clip-art set. Most clip-art is so called “royalty free”, as in you can copy it from computer-to-computer without any copyright issues, because the author specifically said that its royalty free.

      But if you have a copyrighted font, then even copying that font from one computer to another constitutes copyright infringement. (IE: Literally, you aren’t allowed to copy this unless you have the permission of the author).

      So, when you download Midjourney’s training weights, does that act in of itself constitute a copy that violate’s the authors of “Joker” movie? As far as I can tell, yes. Because the training weights clearly contain Joker images.

      • Jilanico@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Looking at a copyrighted font with your computer means the font is in your computer’s memory. Do I go to jail for every site I visit that uses a fancy font?

        Font files ≠ framebuffer

        Images ≠ neural network weights

        • dragontamer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Do I go to jail for every site I visit that uses a fancy font?

          If its a fancy copyrighted font without a license to copy… the Website owner gets sued. Because the website owner is the one making mass copies of said font.

          Do… you know what copyrites are? They relate to the copying of data.

          • Jilanico@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            The framebuffer on your computer copies the data to display the font to you. That’s my point. Not every form of copying infringes on copyright.

            • dragontamer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              And my argument is that Midjourney’s servers are engaged in illegal copying. So I think your point is moot. Not the Web Browsers downloading images.

              The movie Joker’s image is being copied each time the training weights are copied to a new server. Is that not an illegal copy?

              • Jilanico@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                When you look at a picture of the joker online, your browser is caching an image file of the joker on your computer. Is that not an illegal copy?

                • dragontamer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  What the hell is this non-sequitur?

                  What do browser caches have to do with Midjourney servers and training weights?

                  I get that you wanna change the subject. But I dunno if it’s because you don’t understand my argument, or if you’ve realized that my argument is solid and therefore you have no actual counterargument.

                  The copy that people care about are the webservers. That’s why when you run Bittorrent, MPAA or RAII sue the people serving the data. Not the people who use the data. Have you followed any copyright case in the last two or three decades? In this case, it’d be a copyright case vs Midjourney servers.

                  • Jilanico@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    I really do not believe midjourney is storing all the files on the Internet in a humongous database. They are just exposing the AI to them for training just like you expose your computer to them when you visit with your web browser. I’m happy to be wrong about this, but I’m just not convinced. Please try to keep your temper.

      • Schmidtster@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Hows it a red herring to point out we are allowed to use copyrighted materials already? Its not the concern here, yet its what they are using as the concern for their arguments against it.

        • dragontamer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Because copyright law is clear in that computers can’t own a copyright.

          The humans at play are:

          1. The artist who created the original work.

          2. The computer IT team who are copying the data behind the scenes between servers.

          3. You who uses Midjourney to recreate “Joker” movie artwork, likely using the data in #2 which falls under copyright infringement.

          It doesn’t matter how #2 works. It doesn’t matter if its H.265 or MPEG2 or from VHS tapes, or if its a Neural Network using the latest-and-greatest training weights from a GPU-based datasystem. Its just a computer. The ones doing the copyright infringement are the people copying data from place to place.

          • orclev@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            The AI model is not a copy of the set of data used to train it, it’s a derivative work. As such copyright as it currently stands does not apply. It’s possible, likely even, that copyright will be modified in some way soon to account for this, but the situation today says nope, not copyright infringement.

            • Dkarma@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              They’re really trying so hard cuz they absolutely want this to be infringement but it simply isnt on any legal level.