Once again it's that "worst person you know just made a great point" headline
this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
49 points (94.5% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54500 readers
475 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm actually pretty pro-AI (and in particular, pro-FOSS AI), so I'm pretty unhappy about this myself ;p
If nothing else, this kind of shit will mean that only the existing "Intellectual Property" holders will have access to using AI. It would entrench things even more >.<
It may be illegal to distribute it, but it's not illegal to read it. Or train an AI on it, which is the same process.
Would commercializing the trained AI count as a commercial public performance though? The legal problems with AI don't come with the training, but when you start selling it.
I don't see what the problem would be. The AI model and its outputs are not derivative works from a legal perspective.
Huh. Neat