Some argue that bots should be entitled to ingest any content they see, because people can.

Avram Piltch is the editor in chief of Tom’s Hardware, and he’s written a thoroughly researched article breaking down the promises and failures of LLM AIs.

  • donuts@kbin.social
    21·
    1 year ago

    You’re making two, big incorrect assumptions:

    1. Simply seeing something on the internet does not give you any legal or moral rights to use that thing in any way other than things which are, or have previously been, deemed to be “fair use” by a court of law. Individuals have personal rights over their likeness and persona, and copyright holders have rights over their works, whether they are on the internet or not. In other words, there is a big difference between “visible in public” and “public domain”.
    2. More importantly, something that might be considered “fair use” for a human being do to is not necessary “fair use” when a computer or “AI” does it. Judgements of what is and is not fair use are made on a case by case basis as a legal defense against copyright infringement claims, and multiple factors (purpose of use, nature of original work, degree and sustainability of use, market effect, etc.) are often taken into consideration. At the very least, AI use has serious implications on sustainability and markets, especially compared to examples of human use.

    I know these are really tough pills for AI fans to swallow, but you know what they say… “If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.”

    • lily33@lemm.ee
      12·
      1 year ago

      One the contrary - the reason copyright is called that is because it started as the right to make copies. Since then it’s been expanded to include more than just copies, such as distributing derivative works

      But the act of distribution is key. If I wanted to, I could write whatever derivative works in my personal diary.

      I also have the right to count the number of occurrences of the letter ‘Q’ in Harry Potter workout Rowling’s permission. This I can also post my count online for other lovers of ‘Q’, because it’s not derivative (it is ‘derived’, but ‘derivative’ is different - according to Wikipedia it means ‘includes major copyrightable elements’).

      Or do more complex statistical analysis.