Comment by Gormo
6 days ago
So they don't mind work entering the public domain, but they do mind people making use of that work in an organized way after it has? Seems a bit strange.
6 days ago
So they don't mind work entering the public domain, but they do mind people making use of that work in an organized way after it has? Seems a bit strange.
LLMs are not people, and some organized way are worse than others, yes.
In the same way we defined "fair use" for those reviewing a movie for instance to be ok, but we don't find it acceptable to put 99% of the movie with a single comment.
LLMs are tools used by people, like typewriters, paintbrushes, and other types of algorithm.
If a work is in the public domain, that means that people are free to copy it, redistribute it, modify it, and create derivative works from it, using whatever tools suit them.
Right and sometimes thats cool and sometimes it sucks.
Fwiw, I think its a tragedy that our great works of culture can be appropriated to sell Coca-Cola and merchandise
10 replies →
Because a lot of interested people do not want the images and style to be destroyed by A.I. usage.
The images are not destroyed, they all still exist.
I'm not sure if a style is something that can be destroyed, but I don't think AI has done that yet.
I used to be a fan of Star Wars. Then Disney bought the franchise, and transformed it into something that a large number of fans, including me, did not like.
That the old movies exist* does not redeem the current franchise for me.
*: albeit in reality the original films are being preserved by fans and not by the official rights holder.
1 reply →
Styles can absolutely become wack, if the context they're used in becomes wack.
Some countries have moral rights which are perpetual, and are meant to prevent works from being mutilated, defaced, misattributed, or otherwise could cause reputational damage to the author.
It's not unreasonable for an author to want their creation to be enjoyed as it was designed to be, but not torn apart to be reassembled in different ways.
Quick, burn Picasso's Las Meninas! Burn iitttt!!! Velazquez would not have approved, I can tell you that!! Of course he wouldn't have approved, everyone can tell.
/s
Seriously, you can't and should not want to stop others from creating derivative works of works that are in the public domain. Sure, some such will be horrible, so you ignore them and hope others do too. But some will be creative in ways you could not have imagined before seeing/hearing/experiencing them.
It’s not strange if you think how the worth of the images have plummeted down to zero, both emotionally and monetarily, in the last few years. I’m not an artist, nor directly in AI field, but it is weird how I have zero emotional response to any image I see, because I think it might be AI generated.
What about that seems strange?
Well, it's a fundamental contradiction, for starters. Public domain is public domain, as in out of copyright. You can't have something in the public domain, but still have its use be restricted.
The disagreement is not about what is, but what should.
1 reply →