Comment

Comment on If Creators Suing AI Companies Over Copyright Win, It Will Further Entrench Big Tech

Fair enough. What’s your stance on this - should someone be allowed to create a text prompt and a list of settings for a specific model and then sell that data that they 100% created themself?

I haven’t heard anyone saying they think people should not be allowed their sell their own text creation like this, but if they are allowed to, then it means that anyone who wants to sell AI art just needs to sell the instructions for someone else to create the art themself. This could easily be set up as a file format that the purchaser then just has to run on their own. Seems like a waste of energy for everyone to generate their own copy of the work, but I can’t imagine any laws being set up that say people are not allowed to sell their own creations because the purchaser may plug what they created into an AI.

Should this be allowed or should the law extend to people not being allowed to sell text that may be used by someone else to create art?

source

Sort:hotnew top

db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
They can sell it all they want, and then the buyer should be able to share it for free. I’m OK with people selling their labor.

source
- aibler@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Is this because of your general anti-copyright stance, or is this specific to people selling things that some people think are likely to be used to make AI artwork? I mean, are you saying that anyone who makes anything should be allowed to sell what they make and anyone should be allowed to share it for free?
  
  What I am getting at is that you said anything made by AI should be in the public domain, so should prompts that a person rights (100% on their own) be considered “AI art” because they are likely to be turned into AI art? Or do you just think there is nothing special about AI art and all of everyone’s work should be in the public domain?
  
  It would be interesting if we end up with lawyers in court arguing over whether or not something would make a good enough AI art prompt to be it in or out of the public domain.
  
  source
  - db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    I mean, are you saying that anyone who makes anything should be allowed to sell what they make and anyone should be allowed to share it for free?
    
    Precisely. I do not believe that treating intangible things like expressions or ideas as “property” is beneficial to humanity as a whole.
    
    Or do you just think there is nothing special about AI art and all of everyone’s work should be in the public domain?
    
    This. I do not support copyrights. They are a blight on human creativity since the first moment they were put into enforcement and all they did is make non-artistic middlemen rich.
    
    All these problems we have now, is because we are trying to shoehorn a 100-year old legal framework, created when people didn’t even consider something like the internet might exist, to generative AI. This won’t work. It will only be used to screw the poor even worse.
    
    source
    aibler@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Very interesting take, I was mistakenly under the impression that you thought that AI derived artwork should be treated differently than something made by a human creator.
    
    source