this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

Technology

70275 readers
4282 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 news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

GenAI tools ‘could not exist’ if firms are made to pay copyright::undefined

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] valen@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (8 children)

So they're admitting that their entire business model requires them to break the law. Sounds like they shouldn't exist.

[–] Marcbmann@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Reproduction of copyrighted material would be breaking the law. Studying it and using it as reference when creating original content is not.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

humans studying it, is fair use.

[–] Marcbmann@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I don't agree. The publisher of the material does not get to dictate what it is used for. What are we protecting at the end of the day and why?

In the case of a textbook, someone worked hard to explain certain materials in a certain way to make the material easily digestible. They produced examples to explain concepts. Reproducing and disseminating that material would be unfair to the author who worked hard to produce it.

But the author does not have jurisdiction over the knowledge gained. They cannot tell the reader that they are forbidden from using the knowledge gained to tutor another person in calculus. That would be absurd.

IP law protects the works of the creator. The author of a calculus textbook did not invent calculus. As such, copyright law does not apply.

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Copyright can only be granted to works created by a human, but I don’t know of any such restriction for fair use. Care to share a source explaining why you think only humans are able to use fair use as a defense for copyright infringement?

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Because a human has to use talent+effort to make something that's fair use. They adapt a product into something that while similar is noticeably different. AI will

  1. make things that are not just similar but not noticeably different.

  2. There's not an effort in creation. There's human thought behind a prompt but not on the AI following it.

  3. If allowed to AI companies will basically copyright everything...

[–] Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You are aware of the insane amounts of research, human effort and the type of human talent that is required to make a simple piece of software, let alone a complex artificial neural network model whose function is to try and solve whatever stuff...right?

[–] Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Good point. I say the software can be copywrite protected, but not the content the program generates.

[–] hedgehog@ttrpg.network 1 points 1 year ago

Your reply has nothing to do with fair use doctrine.

load more comments (6 replies)