Noerknhar@feddit.org to Fuck AI@lemmy.world · 2 months agoAnthropic can legally train AI on books without authors permission, judge rulescybernews.comexternal-linkmessage-square37linkfedilinkarrow-up1180arrow-down13file-textcross-posted to: ai_@lemmy.worldartificial_intel@lemmy.ml
arrow-up1177arrow-down1external-linkAnthropic can legally train AI on books without authors permission, judge rulescybernews.comNoerknhar@feddit.org to Fuck AI@lemmy.world · 2 months agomessage-square37linkfedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: ai_@lemmy.worldartificial_intel@lemmy.ml
minus-squareParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·2 months ago“Derivative” is less questionable than “work”. For eg. AI Gen imagery is not copyrightable for the most part, legally closer to plagiarism than art?
minus-squareHobbitFoot @thelemmy.clublinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months agoDerivative describes what happened to the copyrighted work, not what slop was churned out by it. If the plagiarism is far enough from the original work, it isn’t protected by the original copyright.
“Derivative” is less questionable than “work”.
For eg. AI Gen imagery is not copyrightable for the most part, legally closer to plagiarism than art?
Derivative describes what happened to the copyrighted work, not what slop was churned out by it.
If the plagiarism is far enough from the original work, it isn’t protected by the original copyright.