Comment on 'An Insult To Life Itself': Hayao Miyazaki’s AI Criticism Resurfaces As OpenAI’s Ghibli-Style Image Trend Takes Over Social Media

• eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  “You have the right to say and do any art! Except any art based off of anything from the last 100 years. You also can’t share any of the art that is the basis for your culture from the last 100 years either. Including the shit no one cares about but is owned by a company that doesn’t want to sell it, just sue anyone who cares about it more than they do.”

  Yes, very freedom, much liberty.

  source

  • mechoman444@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    So you make an art music/picture/story and your friend comes around and makes the same art line I for line, word for word, color for color and makes a killing.

    Too bad there wasn’t some kind of system in place that could have protected your art from intellectual theaft. But you’re right it course the company is hording it.

    source

    • eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Yep! I’m okay with that, intellectual property is theft, and is even more so when copying is nothing but flipping a 0 into a 1. Everyone online has the right to “steal” the words on the screen I “made”.

      Copyright is theft of the public. The companies owning your favorite media isn’t going to fuck you, let alone give you anything but the privilege to charge you for the licence to borrow media until its inconvenient to them.

      source

      • mechoman444@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Right. So you also don’t understand what copyright is. Jesus. What is with you people.

        “Copyright is a legal right that grants the creator of an original work exclusive control over its use and distribution for a limited time. This includes the rights to reproduce, distribute, display, and adapt the work. It protects literary, artistic, musical, and other creative works, preventing unauthorized use.”

        I don’t understand what’s so confusing about this.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  no, i definitely do.

  copyright is the opposite of freedom of speech. any other interpretation is just bending the truth. what is copyright other than putting a monetary value on data and information as if it were a commodity that can be bought, sold, and owned?

  how the fuck is that not directly antithetical to freedom of information? freedom of speech and freedom of information are the same ideas, or at least any true proponent of free speech is a proponent of freedom of information. ig except dense fucking westoids who can’t seem to grasp basic logical concepts.

  source

  • mechoman444@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Yes. Thank you. You definitely don’t not only understand the difference between copyright and the freedom of speech you also fail to grasp simple concepts like freedom, commodity, and owned.

    Not only that you invented a definition of your own to suit your needs to further your argument which you don’t even understand in its most fundamental state.

    So you can be simply dismissed without any further adu.

    source