If you make it reproduce copyrighted media, it is a problem.
As long as the stuff it generates doesn’t resemble any copyrighted works, even if it was trained on copyrighted works, I don’t see why that should be problem.
Comment on Japan determines copyright doesn't apply to LLM/ML training data
friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 8 months ago
What’s stopping somebody from making an LLM that can reproduce media that was used in its training? If that happens, then we’ll have a copyright laundering service.
regbin_@lemmy.world 8 months ago
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I don’t even think there’s a problem recreating it, you just can’t distribute it.
For personal use it’s fine.
Its not like Disney is suing everyone drawing micky mouse in their personal art workbook
Kepabar@startrek.website 8 months ago
What media is an LLM going to be able to reproduce that I can’t already reproduce with a copy paste?
Pirasp@lemmy.world 8 months ago
That’s not the point. If you rip a dvd, you babe the movie, but you can’t sell DVDs with the movie, because it is copyrighted. After the “AI” has recreated it, the copyright is gone, so you can sell that version with impunity.
Evotech@lemmy.world 8 months ago
That’s not how copyright works though
Breve@pawb.social 8 months ago
Copyright infringement is about the act of reproduction, not the tools used to reproduce it. The court effectively said the LLM itself is not illegal just like a photocopier or CD/DVD burner is not illegal. It’s illegal if someone used an LLM, or photocopier, to make an unauthorized copy of a protected work though.
Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 8 months ago
It will go to a judge and the judge will say that changing three pixels doesn’t make it derivative. Regardless of the method of transformation, the same fair use and parody laws apply.
DogWater@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Reproducing copywrited works would be a problem. Consuming them is not.
In your example, a copyright case would be able to move forward and be tested in court. I would think it stands as good of a shot at prevailing in that example. It would be the same as a case against someone who wrote a script for a website to reproduce copyrighted work on command. The difference is this isn’t that. And if and when it does that, the ai can be tuned to prevent it from continuing to do it.
hitmyspot@aussie.zone 8 months ago
Hi chatgpt7, I like legend of Zelda tears of the second kingdom, please code a similar game but change the colour of the grass from light green to medium light green.
DogWater@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Again, that’s producing a copyrighted work. That would be illegal. That isn’t the same as inputting the code into the LLM to use as a reference for when someone asks for help coding movement mechanics for a 3rd person action game of their own imagination