this post was submitted on 10 May 2025
936 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

70048 readers
4201 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 news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. 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
[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au -5 points 5 days ago (23 children)

While I understand their position, I disagree with it.

Training AI on copyrighted data - let’s take music for example - is no different to a kid at home listening to Beatles songs all day and using that as inspiration while learning how to write songs or play an instrument.

You cant copyright a style of music, a sound, or a song structure. As long as the AI isn’t just reproducing the copyrighted content “word for word”, I don’t see what the issue is.

Does the studio ghibli artist own that style of drawing? No, because you can’t own something like that. Others are free to draw whatever they want while replicating that style.

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 5 days ago (9 children)

if i learn a book by heart, and then go around making money by reciting it, then that's illegal. same thing.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

On the other hand, it is not the learning in your example that is illegal, but the recital.

If you learn ten books by heart and make money writing shitty fanfics, thats not necessarily illegal.

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

well yeah. And it has been proven time and again that they can, and do, regurgitate that training material out quite often

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 0 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Yup. I don't think training should be considered breaking copyright. Regurgitating though should.

There are examples of use cases besides the right now obvious one of LLMs "creating" "original" content.

One that comes to my mind is indexing books. Allowing for people to search for books based on a description.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)