zlacker

>>rntn+(OP)
Copyright holders make all kinds of arguments for why they should be get money for incidental exposure to their work. This is all about greed and jealousy. If someone uses AI to make infringing content, existing laws already cover that. The fact that an ML model could be used to generate infringing content, and has exposure to or "knowledge" of some copyrighted material is immaterial. People just see someone else making money and want to try and get a piece of it.

>>andy99+gf
> People just see someone else making money in a way that is completely dependent upon their own prior work and want to try and get a piece of it

>>ethanb+of
It's actually impressive that Weird Al has made it as far as he did now that I think about it

>>qt3141+En
Weird Al explicitly seeks out the permission from the people whose songs he's parodying, despite not really having to (legally), and he compensates them in kind as well, so kinda the exact opposite of what the AI crowd wants to do.