I’ve generally been against giving AI works copyright, but this article presented what I felt were compelling arguments for why I might be wrong. What do you think?

  • Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    If the students are using the works for purposes such as analyzing, critiquing, or illustrating a point, and not merely reproducing them, they have a strong case for fair use. That’s all these models are, original analysis of their training data in comparison with each other. This use is more likely to be considered transformative, meaning that they add something new or different to the original work, rather than merely copying it. If you need it said another way, here’s a link to a video about this sort of thing.

    • FlowVoid
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      So you believe that if you download an mp3 and claim you are “analyzing” it, then you can’t be liable for IP infringement?

      Wow, I wonder why the Napster defendants never thought of that. They could have saved tens of thousands of dollars.