• misk@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Agreed that interim solution should be to make all “AI” work public domain since it treats everything it trains on as public domain. I’m for it because it would would immediately stop being profitable for commercial enterprises. Then check who they ripped off and settle any financial claims and damages before moving on to establish license for already created output.

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly. Make ALL output public domain. Force them to release their training sets. Force them to open source their models.

      There will still be companies like Adobe and DeviantArt who will be able to work around this due to their ToS, but we have enough existing models to make them obsolete due to the power of FOSS.

        • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Of course things are messy. I still think it’s the best option. I would say that yes, a character with AI eyes, would be public domain. Treat it like the GPL. If a small part of your code is GPL, all of your code has to be GPL.

          Likewise, it isn’t easy to prove, people will get away with it doing in very small quantities and sufficiently reworking it, but extravagant examples would be caught, like serial plagiarists eventually are. The resulting loss in credibility could end careers. Of course, the best approach would be to completely remove copyrights altogether, then this wouldn’t be an issue at all.

            • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              They can sell it all they want, and then the buyer should be able to share it for free. I’m OK with people selling their labor.

                • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I mean, are you saying that anyone who makes anything should be allowed to sell what they make and anyone should be allowed to share it for free?

                  Precisely. I do not believe that treating intangible things like expressions or ideas as “property” is beneficial to humanity as a whole.

                  Or do you just think there is nothing special about AI art and all of everyone’s work should be in the public domain?

                  This. I do not support copyrights. They are a blight on human creativity since the first moment they were put into enforcement and all they did is make non-artistic middlemen rich.

                  All these problems we have now, is because we are trying to shoehorn a 100+ year old legal framework, created when people didn’t even consider something like the internet might exist, to generative AI. This won’t work. It will only be used to screw the poor even worse.

      • misk@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        (I edited my comment slightly due to my scatter brain then saw you basically expanding my thought in the same way)