Comment

Comment on Internet Archive’s big battle with music publishers ends in settlement

Actually there are several legal arguments about this currently ongoing.

There isn’t really a final decision yet, but I think I agree with Cory Doctorow’s opinion that the solution is to make the output of generative AI tools uncopywritable/public domain. This protects artists broadly, as any company that wants to produce a copywrited final work (e.g. film, television, music, books, etc) will need to hire an artist to do it.

source

Sort:hotnew top

duhlieluh@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
i think that should be a given but it does not solve peoples work being taken and mutilated by an algorithm.

certainly takes incentive out of it for someone that wants to use it for a production, but im sure there are ways they would get around it.

source
- NaibofTabr@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  You’re right that it’s not a complete solution. Offhand, it seems like this won’t help graphic designers that make advertising graphics if the advertiser doesn’t really care about copyright protection - or basically anything that is expected to have a short lifespan (who cares if an ad campaign that runs for a week is copyrighted?).
  
  Are those jobs worth fighting over? There are probably a lot more graphic artists making a living producing bilboards and web ads &etc than there are making a living selling their own art, but are those jobs something that society at large should make an effort to protect?
  
  source
Cocodapuf@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

I think I agree with Cory Doctorow’s opinion

I’d say that’s always a good position. I don’t think I’ve ever seen him come out on the wrong side of a topic.

source
- corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  I have argued with him. He can tend to throw up flippant back-hands, but his prepared arguments are good.
  
  source
  - Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    I’d rather have it that way around than the contrary.
    
    source