Comment on The AI-focused COPIED Act would make removing digital watermarks illegal

• just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Downvote all you want. If your entire business or personal model includes stealing content from other people, then you need to rethink that.

  source

  • Badeendje@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    “stealing” implies the owner does not have it anymore… It is large studio speak.

    And I get what you are trying so say, I just think the copyright system is so broken that this shows it is in need of reform. Because if the qualm is with people doing immoral shit as a business model, there are long lists of corporations that will ask you to hold their beer.

    And the fact that the training of the models already occurred on these materials means that the owners of the current models are probably training on generated datasets meaning that by the time this actually hits court, the datasets with original copyrighted materials will be obsolete.

    source

    • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      [deleted]

      source

      • Badeendje@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Well that’s a well articulated reply.

        I don’t understand why you would take this position. Because the small artists will never be able to avoid Beiing included in training sets, and if they are what are they going to do against a VC backed corpnlike OpenAI. All the while the big copyright “owners” will be excluded. Meaning this only cements the position of the mega corps.

        source
      • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        No, you are. You’ll be in a hell of your own making when you’re going to be paying a subscription to the corpo AIs just to remain employable.

        Honestly reading this shit I know why structures of oppression like capitalism etc exist, it is because of dumb motherfuckers like you and I feel absolutely zero sympathy, you deserve all of it and more.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • GBU_28@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Comment breaks community standards.

        source
    • fuzzzerd@programming.dev ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Regarding obsolete models, that’s only partially true. There’s loads of content that are effectively “finished” and won’t be changing, and will grow obsolete at a fairly slow pace. Meaning they’ll be useful in the models once trained for years.

      Obviously new technology and similar ideas/content that didn’t exist when the model was created won’t be there, but the amount that changes and or is new is relatively small each year compared to all the historical content.

      source
  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Stealing: depriving you of what you own

    Copying: taking a picture of what you made.

    Stealing is not copying. You still have whatever you started with.

    source
  • GBU_28@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Openai exec: oh shit damn,. Damn. I gotta call my mom.

    source
• just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Is it Copyright content?

  source

  • v_krishna@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    This regulation (and similar being proposed in California) would not be applied retroactively.

    source

    • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Never mentioned any sort of retroactive measures.

      source

      • snooggums@midwest.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Since no retroactive measures are mentioned, the companies that already scraped the web won’t be stopped from continuing to use the AI models already trained on that data, but anyone else would be stopped by the law.

        It is like making it illegal to rob banks after someone already robbed all the banks and letting them keep all the money.

        The law could have made it illegal for use of models trained on the copyrighted materials without permission instead of targeting the process for collecting it.

        source