Authors using a new tool to search a list of 183,000 books used to train AI are furious to find their works on the list.

  • kibiz0r
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d say they should have to follow the most-restrictive license of all of their training data, and that existing CC/FOSS licenses don’t count because they were designed for use in a pre-LLM world.

    It seems like a pretty reasonable request. But people like free stuff, and when they think about who will get screwed by this they like to imagine that they’re sticking it to the biggest publishers of mass media.

    But IRL, those publishers are giddy with the idea that instead of scouting artists and bullying them into signing over their IP, they can just summon IP on demand.

    The people who will suffer are the independents who refused to sign over their IP. They never got their payday, and now they never will either.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think we just need to ban the ability to copyright any AI output. Unless you can prove you created, and or paid for the rights for every piece of training data, I don’t see how it’s fair. Even then, there are still arguments against letting AI create IP.