The “issue” is that this logic applies to all human creations as well.
Comment on AI Video Generator Runway Trained on Thousands of YouTube Videos Without Permission
gwindli@lemy.lol 2 months ago
I’m starting to think commercial AI should be banned. if the only way to make useful models is by ingesting human culture, then all humans should benefit from it without having to pay to have that culture shat back out in response to a prompt.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
gwindli@lemy.lol 2 months ago
i disagree. IP laws have more or less handled humans stealing ideas from humans for commercial gain. not perfectly by any means… but both the scale an impunity and frankly the entitlement exhibited by these GenAI companies is on another level.
no matter how many times people make the argument that AIs are just “doing what humans do”, it fails to sway me. an AI copying, ingesting and tokenizing other people’s intellectual property is nothing like a human watching a video or hearing a song and creating something based upon or derived from it. a database backed algorithm does nothing even remotely like a human mind. it’s using software to process and regurgitate the works of others, and that is pretty plainly IP theft.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
I’m not saying the process is exactly the same but conceptually it’s quite similar. Humans don’t create original ideas. They build on what came before. Maybe a truly brilliant artist or inventor adds 1% new ideas. That’s not enough to justify the extremely broad ownership of ideas that exists in our society.
Humans have been freely copying each other for millions of years. It’s how we built everything we have. Ideas and art were not meant to be owned. The very concept of owning something non-physical is violent and authoritarian in nature. Without physical possession, the only way IP laws can be enforced is a global police empire, which the US has successfully created for its own enrichment at the expense of the global poor.
jarfil@beehaw.org 2 months ago
Humans have been freely copying each other for millions of years.
False. Master artisans have been keeping their knowledge secret in order to maintain a competitive advantage, only eventually passing their knowledge to the most advanced of their apprentices. Temporary monopolies (Patents), and temporary Copyright protections, have enabled the exponential expansion of knowledge.
Keyword being “temporary”. We have Disney to thank for turning Copyright’s temporariness into a mockery of itself.
p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 months ago
Injecting logic, facts, and moderation into an AI conversation? Get the fuck outta here!
jarfil@beehaw.org 2 months ago
IP laws have more or less handled humans stealing ideas from humans for commercial gain. not perfectly by any means…
“Until author’s death + 70 years”… not perfectly, is WAY of an understatement.
Ava@beehaw.org 2 months ago
Sure, but the argument isn’t “should we ban work that is based on the study of past cultural creation” it’s “we should prevent computational/commercial exploitation of past cultural creation in order to protect the interests of humans.”
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
I’m saying we’ve already allowed corporate exploitation of human culture for centuries. But yes, by all means, if AI is the last straw then I’m with you. But I want people to see the broader picture and not hyperfocus only on AI.
GBU_28@lemm.ee 2 months ago
SHOW ME WHAT YOU GOT
master5o1@lemmy.nz 2 months ago
I think the alternative: copyright should be looser. It usually only benefits corporations and lawyers.
Though it would be naive to consider AI companies and ally in a goal to reduce copyright terms.
jarfil@beehaw.org 2 months ago
Same can be said of commercial Schools, Colleges, and Universities.
drdiddlybadger@pawb.social 2 months ago
Im starting to agree with that premise. Since these models only exist using the public’s data they should be public models only. No commercial use.