this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2023
309 points (93.3% liked)

Technology

59575 readers
3557 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Data poisoning: how artists are sabotaging AI to take revenge on image generators::As AI developers indiscriminately suck up online content to train their models, artists are seeking ways to fight back.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You can get it to spit out something very close, maybe even exact depending on how much of your art was used in the training (Because that would make your style influence the weights and model more)

But that's no different than me tracing your art or taking samples of your art to someone else and paying them to make an exact copy, in that case that specific output is a copyright violation. Just because it can do that, doesn't mean every output is suddenly a copyright violation.

[–] BURN@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

However since it’s required to use all of the illegally obtained and in-licensed work to create it, it is a copyright violation, just as tracing over something would be. Again, existing copyright law cannot be applied here because this technology works in a vastly different way than a human artist.

A hard line has to be made that will protect artists. I’d prefer it go even farther in protecting individual copyright while weakening overall copyright for corporate owners.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

illegally obtained [...] work

It what jurisdiction is it illegal?

And is "obtained" even the right word?...

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

There’s currently multiple lawsuits in the courts to decide just that.

If they’re scraping the internet to add to a database of training data, I’d consider that obtaining and storing the work.

[–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

Except they're not storing the work. They store information about the work.