zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. silent+(OP)[view] [source] 2022-12-15 17:13:17
The way these image generating neural nets are trained is illegal. They copy and use other artists' work without asking them or paying them. There's a lot of legal exposure here - why hasn't anyone taken advantage of that yet?
replies(2): >>ChadNa+o2 >>Octopu+B11
2. ChadNa+o2[view] [source] 2022-12-15 17:22:47
>>silent+(OP)
In the US we have fair use, and it's not clear at all to me that this wouldn't count. If I took every image on artstation and averaged all of them (creating a muddy mess), I think I would be legally able to distribute the result without compensating or crediting the original artists.
3. Octopu+B11[view] [source] 2022-12-15 22:12:00
>>silent+(OP)
What makes you say it's illegal?

In the EU, UK, Japan and Singapore, it is explicitly legal to train AI on copyrighted work. I saw another comment say that AI companies train in those countries.

[go to top]