Comment by red75prime

Comment by red75prime 16 hours ago

If you define feeding of copyrighted material into a non-human learning machine as theft, then sure. Anything that mitigates legal consequences will be a fig leaf.

The question is "should we define it as such?"

reginald78 12 hours ago

The fact that they have guardrails to try and prevent it means OpenAI themselves thinks it is at least shady or outright illegal in someway. Otherwise why bother?

Reply View 0 replies

vkou 16 hours ago

If a graphics design company was using human artists to do the same thing that OpenAI is, they'd be sued out of existence.

But because a computer, and not a human does it, they get to launder their responsibility.

Reply View 2 replies

red75prime 15 hours ago

Doing what? Telling their artists to create what they want regardless of copyright and then filtering the output?
For humans it doesn't make sense because we have generation and filtering in a single package.

Reply View | 1 reply
- vkou 8 hours ago
  
  In this case the output wasn't filtered. They are just producing images of Harrison Ford, and I don't think they are allowed to use his likeness in that way.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies