this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
525 points (98.2% liked)

Technology

59568 readers
4353 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

‘Impossible’ to create AI tools like ChatGPT without copyrighted material, OpenAI says::Pressure grows on artificial intelligence firms over the content used to train their products

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Neither is a corporation and yet they claim first amendment rights.

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That’s an entirely separate problem, but is certainly a problem

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don't think it is. We have all these non-human stuff we are awarding more rights to than we have. You can't put a corporation in jail but you can put me in jail. I don't have freedom from religion but a corporation does.

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Corporations are not people, and should not be treated as such.

If a company does something illegal, the penalty should be spread to the board. It’d make them think twice about breaking the law.

We should not be awarding human rights to non-human, non-sentient creations. LLMs and any kind of Generative AI are not human and should not in any case be treated as such.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Corporations are not people, and should not be treated as such.

Understand. Please tell Disney that they no longer own Mickey Mouse.

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Again, I literally already said that it’s a problem.

IP law is also different than granting rights to corporations. Corporations SHOULD be allowed to own IP, provided they’ve compensated the creator.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

For 90 years after the ceator's death?

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Honestly, yes. I’m ok with that. People are not entitled to be able to do anything they want with someone else’s IP. 90 years is almost reasonable. Cut it in half and I’d also consider it fairly reasonable.

I’m all for expanding copyright for individuals and small companies (small media companies, photographers who are incorporated, artists who make money based on commissions, etc) and reducing it for mega corps, but there’s an extremely fine line around that.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago

Well I am not. If the goal is to promote artistic creation it should not follow inheritance. Heck it shouldn't even be 45 years. No one at Disney was alive when Mickey was made therefore it should be public domain.

Once you fix that let me know.