this is an interesting take! it seems to me that if this is actually true, we will need a legal definition of "AI" (or, rather, machine learning), because presumably selecting snippets of prose with dice is _not_ fair use?https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1412785073171034113 …
-
There is no valid legal definition, because even general AI (i.e. humans) can memorize copyrighted content and spit it out no problem. I can type out lyrics to some of my favorite songs by heart, and they're still copyrighted.
So, then, copyright is over. I can make an "AI" (by which I assume, in this context, we're referring to ML) that takes in white noise and is so overfitted onto Beauty and the Beast that it spits out a slightly color-inaccurate version of that film, and have that count as new.
-
-
And, to be clear, I am all for the end of copyright - but you know that wouldn't apply to randos, just the big corporations. It's a one way street.
Danke! Twitter wird dies nutzen, um deine Timeline zu verbessern. Rückgängig machenRückgängig machen
-
Das Laden scheint etwas zu dauern.
Twitter ist möglicherweise überlastet oder hat einen vorübergehenden Schluckauf. Probiere es erneut oder besuche Twitter Status für weitere Informationen.