this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023
95 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

191 readers
1 users here now

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the latest developments, trends, and innovations in the world of technology. Whether you are a tech enthusiast, a developer, or simply curious about the latest gadgets and software, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as artificial intelligence, robotics, cloud computing, cybersecurity, and more. From the impact of technology on society to the ethical considerations of new technologies, this category covers a wide range of topics related to technology. Join the conversation and let's explore the ever-evolving world of technology together!

founded 2 years ago
95
OpenAI says it could ‘cease operating’ in the EU if it can’t comply with future regulation (www.theverge.com)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
107 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In addition to the possible business threat, forcing OpenAI to identify its use of copyrighted data would expose the company to potential lawsuits. Generative AI systems like ChatGPT and DALL-E are trained using large amounts of data scraped from the web, much of it copyright protected. When companies disclose these data sources it leaves them open to legal challenges. OpenAI rival Stability AI, for example, is currently being sued by stock image maker Getty Images for using its copyrighted data to train its AI image generator.

Aaaaaand there it is. They don’t want to admit how much copyrighted materials they’ve been using.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] howrar 1 points 2 years ago

The article says nothing about the models violating copyright. They do say that the laws require them to disclose the use of any copyrighted material, which I believe is pretty black or white with current laws.

In any case, I don't know if I'd call it copyright infringement, but the crux of the matter is that artists do not want their work to be used in this way. There are two main problems with this that I'm aware of (second hand info from talking to one person involved in the art community):

  1. Taking their work and profiting off them without giving anything in return to the artists is a sure way to discourage them from creating anything new in the first place.
  2. To a lot of artists, your work is very personal. It draws from your own life and experiences and is, in a way, a portal into their minds. Much like how replicating a person's voice can make them very uncomfortable. If you produce something in the original style of an artist, you're essentially putting words in their mouth. When you produce something using an amalgamation of everyone's work, that's been described to me as a weird Frankenstein monster of everyone's voices but with the soul removed. I'm still trying to figure out what this part means though. Not something I can relate to since I'm not an artist myself, but I know I wouldn't be comfortable having someone sell my voice saying things I didn't say without my consent.

This is of course assuming you agree with the goal of promoting innovation, both in technology and in arts.