zlacker

>>pyman+(OP)
If AI companies are allowed to use pirated material to create their products, does it mean that everyone can use pirated software to create products? Where is the line?

Also please don't use word "learning", use "creating software using copyrighted materials".

Also let's think together how can we prevent AI companies from using our work using technical measures if the law doesn't work?

>>codedo+k01
But the AI used the content to learn how to copy and recreate it. Is ‘re-creation’ a better concept for us?

People already use pirated software for product creation.

Hypothetical:

I know a guy who learned photoshop on a pirated copy of Photoshop. He went on to be a graphic designer. All his earnings are ‘proceeds from crime’

He never used the pirated software to produce content.

>>whycom+Uc1
So can we officially download pirated content to learn stuff now?

>>timeon+dl1
How often does a link get posted here of content that is behind a paywall? If you bypass it to read it, didny't you just learn via illegal content? I'm not sure where the "official" comes in, but it's clearly widely accepted.

If you watch a YouTube video to learn something and it's later taken down for using copyrighted images, you learned from illegal content.

>>whycom+3B1
"Official" comes in court cases for LLMs with "fair use" result. That is my point. I was not talking about de facto but about de jure. I wasn't hinting to the morality of the action but morality of the two-tier judgement.