• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -46 months ago

    It’s not that easy, don’t believe the articles being broadcasted every day. They are heavily cherry picked.

    Also, if someone is creating copyright works, it is on that person to be responsible if they release or sell it, not the tool they used. Just because the tool can be good (learns well and responds well when asked to make a clone of something) doesn’t mean it is the only thing it does or must do. It is following instructions, which were to make a thing. The one giving the instructions is the issue, and the intent of that person when they distribute is the issue.

    If I draw a perfect clone of Donald Duck in the privacy of my home after looking at hundreds of Donald Duck images online, there is nothing wrong with that. If I go on Etsy and start selling them without a license, they will come after ME. Not because I drew it, but because I am selling it and violating a copyright. They won’t go after the pencil or ink manufacturer. And they won’t go after Adobe if I drew it on a computer with Photoshop.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -26 months ago

        You are missing his point. Is Disney going after the one who is selling the copy online, or are they going after Adobe?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -16 months ago

            Some of us have to work for a living, I can’t reply to every comment the moment it comes in and it seems rude to break the chaine.

            In his analogy, openais product was the tool. You can do the same with both img gen and Photoshop, and neither of these prop up their product by implying it’s easy to copyright infringe. That’s why I said you were missing his point but you do you buddy.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              That guy is total loss, a tragic clown as i am not sure if i should cry or laugh about them. I am not sure what businesses they had in this argument at all except pissing off people who are better informed.

              I’ve only just saw the comment where he seemed to suggest that the final trained model contains all trained materials in full… and that combined with not once but multiple times pretending they know all about llm’s that foss ai doesnt exist and we its we that all dont know how any of this tech works… i seriously have to restrain myself to leave that gross misconception as it is as i don’t want them to respond. I hope the down-votes do their job.

              I am sorry to vent, kinda just had to :)