Comment on Japan determines copyright doesn't apply to LLM/ML training data
camelbeard@lemmy.world 10 months agoIf you read a book you can talk about it, quote it, draw characters from that book, write your own ending, etc.
Isn’t that kind of the same? Let’s say some day we have an AI with near human intelligence, why can’t the AI be trained on copyright works, just like humans, all our school books are copyrighted works?
Geobloke@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Because you paid for that book?
camelbeard@lemmy.world 10 months ago
So if AI companies pay for a book or music (like a consumer) it’s no problem? Because I don’t think this is about paying for content, it’s that content holders refuse to work with AI companies.
Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 months ago
Unironically yes, if AI companies paid for training data everyone would be much happier.
I sincerely doubt that NOBODY is willing to sell data to them. It’s far more likely that they have not offered anyone a fair price yet, which makes sense because that would set a precedent.
Even then, if people don’t want to sell them their copyrighted work then tough. You can’t compel people to take customers they don’t want.
ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 months ago
So if I go on a free website that hosts art (ArtStation, DeviantArt, etc.) and get training data that I could have legally accessed for free…