this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2024
1306 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

60060 readers
3424 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It's all made from our data, anyway, so it should be ours to use as we want

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

So what you're saying is that there's no way to make it legal and it simply needs to be deleted entirely.

I agree.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

There's no need to "make it legal", things are legal by default until a law is passed to make them illegal. Or a court precedent is set that establishes that an existing law applies to the new thing under discussion.

Training an AI doesn't involve copying the training data, the AI model doesn't literally "contain" the stuff it's trained on. So it's not likely that existing copyright law makes it illegal to do without permission.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

There’s no need to “make it legal”, things are legal by default until a law is passed to make them illegal.

Yes, and that's already happened: it's called "copyright law." You can't mix things with incompatible licenses into a derivative work and pretend it's okay.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

By this logic, you can copy a copyrighted imege as long as you decrease the resolution, because the new image does not contain all the information in the original one.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 13 hours ago

More like reduce it to a handful of vectors that get merged with other vectors.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Am I allowed to take a copyrighted image, decrease its size to 1x1 pixels and publish it? What about 2x2?

It's very much not clear when a modification violates copyright because copyright is extremely vague to begin with.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Just because something is defined legally instead of technologically, that doesn't make it vague. The modification violates copyright when the result is a derivative work; no more, no less.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

What is a derivative work though? That's again extremely vague and has been subject to countless lawsuits seeking to determine the bounds.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

In the case of Stable Diffusion, they used 5 billion images to train a model 1.83 gigabytes in size. So if you reduce a copyrighted image to 3 bits (not bytes - bits), then yeah, I think you're probably pretty safe.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 54 minutes ago

Your calculation is assuming that the input images are statistically independent, which is certainly not the case (otherwise the model would be useless for generating new images)