this post was submitted on 10 May 2025
930 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
69947 readers
2235 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
They do, but the point still stands. No one “owns” what these AIs are learning. That’s what they’re doing - learning, and they’re learning from copyrighted material the same way people learn from copyrighted material. The copyright holders - mainly artists - are just super upset about it because it’s showing that what they provide can be easily learned and emulated by computers.
They’re the horse and carriage sellers when cars were invented.
You miss the part where the copyright owner did not assign them the rights to use the material for such a purpose, and yes most copyright does cover a ton of stuff like retransmission, reproduction, public production and a bunch of other shit which is all separate license. It's not so simple as "they did what a human does" because even the WAYS a human uses said material is limited under the terms of the copyright
But they didn’t use it for any of those purposes. Training an AI model isn’t doing any of that. Which do you think they did specifically?
Humans can learn from any copyrighted material they want to. Copyright doesn’t, and can’t, prevent that.