this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
430 points (83.1% liked)

Technology

59595 readers
2961 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s
[email protected]
[email protected]
L4s
enu
430
We Asked A.I. to Create the Joker. It Generated a Copyrighted Image. (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 10 months ago by L4s to c/technology
396 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There's no money for them in that angle though. It's much easier to sue xerox for enabling copyright violations than the person who used the machine to violate copyright.

Courts have already handled this with copy machines. AI isn't terribly different, it's unlikely these suits against model creators succeed.

[โ€“] kromem 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

There's money (and more importantly, survival) if they can ensure liability of Xerox for infringement on the use of their centralized copiers.

There actually isn't survival as a company even if they succeed on training but not the other, which I don't think they realize yet.

As an aside, one of the worst legal takes I read on this was from a GC at the Copyright office during the 70s who extensively used poor analogies to copiers to justify an infringement argument.