GenAI tools ‘could not exist’ if firms are made to pay copyright::undefined

    • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Copyright can only be granted to works created by a human, but I don’t know of any such restriction for fair use. Care to share a source explaining why you think only humans are able to use fair use as a defense for copyright infringement?

      • phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Because a human has to use talent+effort to make something that’s fair use. They adapt a product into something that while similar is noticeably different. AI will

        1. make things that are not just similar but not noticeably different.

        2. There’s not an effort in creation. There’s human thought behind a prompt but not on the AI following it.

        3. If allowed to AI companies will basically copyright everything…

        • Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          You are aware of the insane amounts of research, human effort and the type of human talent that is required to make a simple piece of software, let alone a complex artificial neural network model whose function is to try and solve whatever stuff…right?

    • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      What’s the difference? Humans are just the intent suppliers, the rest of the art is mostly made possible by software, whether photoshop or stable diffusion.