US Copyright hearing on AI coming up. Thoughts? No? Posted on March 17, 2023 by Anonymous US Copyright hearing on AI coming up. Thoughts? No 4chan ITT.
Pointless. The real issues will be dealt with in courts.
Artists ultimately shot themselves in the foot by getting the government involved which will 100% of the time side with corporations that have historically fucked artista in the ass. Good shit
They'll be fucking themselves in the ass then. government jobs will be the first to be automated by AI. Have you seen how many staff they're paying for?
First the AI took their art, then the machine god took their brain matter.
Even if using Copyrighted stuff in training isn't allowed
You can always just train an AI on non-copyrighted works, it's not like there aren't 2000 years of free art/photography for us to use...
copyright is a spook
>just train everything on the digital media from 200 years ago, bro
>2000 years of photography
retards don't understand the extent to which everything is copyrighted and how much you have to pay to use even 100 year-old material. there's no such thing as a public domain.
2000 years of material I should have said.
2000 years of text and art
100 years of photography which btw is also trivial to get. everything you upload to any website ever you practically give away any rights you had on it...
>Photography didn't exist until 1923
Camera obscura has been a well-known technology since at least 500 BC. I don't know if they had access to any light-sensitive materials back then, but even tracing the outlines by hand could be thought of as a primitive form of photography.
No chance. How did I do?
>We can use existing prior art from other artists to learn from
>Often by directly copying it repeatedly first
>Its okay if we mash up shit we find on google images in photoshop or other editing programs and redraw the final version over the top of it to make it 'ours' using an existing image as a 'guide'
>It's called a 'reference' sweaty *sips tea*
>No, AI should not be allowed to learn concepts from prior existing art which is only 5% of what we do with using prior art to make new art
>What do you mean? JUST BECAUSE OKAY?!
>No 4chan ITT.
lmao. you sound like those chuds on youtube that put "no copyright infringement intended" in the description. but yeah, woo, another AI thread, just what we needed, thanks OP.
The whole copyright and law debate is really pointless.
This is ultimately a matter of national security. It's Darwinian in nature, whichever country limits their AI the least is going to "win". You can bet your ass China won't give a damn, so neither can anyone else, unless you're earning social credit for Xi Jinping's Basilisk.
If any laws come out of this it's gonna hurt real artists more, create rules that only big corporations can follow, and grant new powers to copyright trolls everywhere.
In my opinion AI art is akin to automated sampling in music. You should probably clear the rights with all those you're basing the generated output off of it you're using the work commercially, otherwise all output should be considered public domain or have an explicit non commercial clause.
I see the biggest issue is artists are worried about is potentially losing work, if the artists can get paid for allowing their work to be used in commercial AI models then everyone should be happy, right? Those who oppose can opt out, and those who want in can opt in, and be compensated for it.
>In my opinion AI art is akin to automated sampling in music. You should probably clear the rights with all those you're basing the generated output off of it you're using the work commercially, otherwise all output should be considered public domain or have an explicit non commercial clause.
The generated output is not based off another artwork when you create a composition, and you can quite literally compose an image to your liking, X here, Y there, character in Z pose over there etc (control net, posex, open pose, etc), you can design a composition visually with latent couple or other tools, unlike digital artists that quite often do base their images off other artwork as either references, or placing multiple images in a canvas in photoshop and drawing over the top of it in their style.
You can even sketch a rough image to use as the compostion, mountains there, moon there, watch tower in lower left, dirt road there etc.
Yeah, sure. I guess, but the models are still derived from artwork that artists have very generously made public without much restrictions on how you use it. I feel like it would show some goodwill to compensate those who's work is what made your product viable, regardless of if they deserve it.
>No 4chan ITT.
no real answers then
fine, I won't tell you what will happen
not my problem