Comment

Comment on Artists dump X as launch of new AI image editing feature sparks outrage - Cryptopolitan

NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

new tool could be used to modify others’ works without their consent.

This specific part is kinda stupid.

Nothing was ever preventing anyone from modifying an artists work. Its incredibly common.

No one needs consent to modify anything.

To distrubute something that isn’t yours that doesn’t fall under fair use, absolutely. But modifying without consent is a joke.

source

Sort:hotnew top

4am@lemmy.zip ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

Modifying without consent

May I introduce to you, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act

source
- NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  May I introduce you to Fair Use Doctrine.
  
  www.dmca.com/FAQ/What-is-Fair-Use
  
  source
Syrc@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
I think all the uproar is about new Grok functions that allow you to edit with AI and repost (aka distribute) images directly from within Xitter (I’m not sure that this is the case but I’m definitely not going to log in that thing to verify that).

source
- NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  I wasn’t going to log in to verify either lol.
  
  Even if that’s the case, it will come down to fair use policy which will allow quite a lot.
  
  If the specific instance of sharing isn’t fair use and Twitter allows it, then sue them, someone will.
  
  source
  - brucethemoose@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    
    If someone starts trying to make money off modified images via Grok, then that becomes a much easier case to win.
    
    They can use it to farm engagement. Is that the same thing?
    
    And yeah, that’s the icky part. This is a dream for spammers and “cheap SEO” types who don’t really care about copyright law in this context.
    
    source
    NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    I wonder how that would go in court, I wonder if it’s been tried before? I could see an argument that if that was the intention and how they made money maybe it wouldn’t be fair use.
    
    source
  - inconel@lemmy.ca ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    Many artists explicitly state no repost without their permissio, requiring proper credits and such. It IS a dick move to reposts with edits while directly interacting author’s post; that makes people using the AI feature violating author’s will knowingly.
    
    In reality, people don’t read poster’s comment or bio, when “single button to AIgen and use the art as prompt” exists. But it’s basically X greenlit anyone to do so against artists’ will, and fair use can argue the use of art but never force artists to stay in a platform. That’s what’s happening.
    
    source