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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    611 months ago

    So then the people operating this AI and offering paid services are legally in the wrong and should be taken down or pay reparations to everyone they’ve stolen from.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      511 months ago

      Again, that makes as much sense as holding Staedtler responsible because someone used their pencils to duplicate a copyrighted work.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 months ago

        If Staedtler sampled copywritten works to create pencils that automatically steal it without attribution on demand, then yes it would be exactly like that.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      311 months ago

      So do you want to shutdown Google because I can type “spongebob squarepants” into Google images and Google with give me an image of spongebob?

      Please put some thought into the implications of what you’re saying outside of AI before you make a knee-jerk reaction like that.

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

        Those images in the search results are one of three categories:

        1. Officially licensed and distributed works that Spongebob IP owners signed off on

        2. Fair use works, namely noncommercial and parody

        3. Illegal works the posters of which can be sued

        Google themselves didn’t create those images. Google didn’t intentionally profit off of illegal works without giving credit. Google didn’t post those images themselves. AI did all of those things.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          211 months ago

          It doesn’t matter if Google creates the images.

          It doesn’t matter if they “intend” to profit from illegal works.

          It doesn’t matter if they “give credit” (this is the one that’s the dumbest because it just reeks of ignorance, like thinking you can use whatever works you like as long as you put a credit to them in the description)

          Google showing you copywritten images when you search for them is not different than when an AI does it.

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

            It does actually matter if Google creates the images and then sells them directly. That is what this discussion is about. If you don’t want to be a part of the discussion, fuck off then.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              111 months ago

              Imagine getting this riled up over a stranger on lemmy thinking something different to you.

              Maybe put the phone down, take a deep breath and go for a walk outside for a moment.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                111 months ago

                I see you’ve abandoned your argument to express your mental image of somebody you’ve never seen or heard before. I accept your resignation, then, happy to help you see the light.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  111 months ago

                  Jesus christ this is the most redditor comment.

                  Okay buddy, I resign. So you can add another tally to your “Internet arguments won” board. I hope your mom makes extra tendies for you tonight in celebration.