Yes, so this means Commercial Use is covered by Copyright and an exception under Copyright law is required. The win here is that, previously, fringe lawyers for companies would claim this was outside Copyright.
@alexjc
-
Non-Expressive Use Theory in AI Legal Framework
By
–
Non-Expressive Use is a theory that has been used in the legal fringe to defend certain practices. It does not forbid anything per-se.
-
Hugging Face dataset compliance issues and DMCA violations
By
–
Arguably, many datasets are *directly* infringing so there's no need for the extra steps to show fundamental problems on the platform. HF struggles with basic DMCA compliance…
-
Data Laws Favor Big Tech Over Artists and Creators
By
–
(totally abusing the fact I can write more than 280 characters) Current law is fine for large corporations, as they can use all the data they want and then rely on lobbying to get the laws changed in their favor. It only screws artists/authors by using their likeness, styles,
-
Memorization and Plagiarism Issues in Generative Models
By
–
It's not possible for generation to be expressive without those expressions coming primarily from training. (Prompts are simply not "expressive" enough in most cases). The top text/image models all have memorization problems, plagiarism problems, and those are sign that training
-
Non-Expressive Use Legal Theory in AI Copyright Debate
By
–
Non-Expressive Use is a legal theory. Whether they get away with it depends on many other things, but IMHO they have one fewer arguments.
-
Human Discernment and Detecting Artificial Intelligence: Evolutionary Selection
By
–
How come humans have an eery ability to detect fakes? Why is the uncanny valley a thing? Because the people that survived the previous apocalyptic cycle and subsequent dark age were the ones with discernment, while the rest died out. #microfiction #maybe
-
AI-generated face blending and data privacy concerns
By
–
It *could* technically be unrecognisable blend of faces with infinitesimally small contributions from the input data. But it would look average and suspicious…
-
Google funding Creative Commons raises transparency concerns
By
–
At the time, Google was (and likely still is) funding Creative Common. Lots of irregularities in their yearly reporting to cover up current funding sources… Anyone have the courage & patience to dig into it?
-
AI Likeness Theft: Why Real Data Beats Pure Generation
By
–
To replies asking: "Why did they steal her likeness rather than generating someone from scratch?"
— Alex J. Champandard 🌱 (@alexjc) 9 mars 2024
Because AI alone does not breach the uncanny valley. It has to be example-based to be anywhere close to trustworthy. (Ab)using real people and real content will remain necessary. https://t.co/LnUutk8n2yTo replies asking: "Why did they steal her likeness rather than generating someone from scratch?" Because AI alone does not breach the uncanny valley. It has to be example-based to be anywhere close to trustworthy. (Ab)using real people and real content will remain necessary.