• Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Well there’s a difference between “don’t look at my work without paying me, even if it’s posted publicly” and “don’t sell my work without paying me, even if it’s posted publicly”

    Like I said, there’s nothing we can do about companies using all the data they can get their hands on for private R&D. It IS possible to protect against the second case, where companies can’t sell an LLM product with copyrighted training data.

    My question was about how that second case could be extended to stuff posted on the Fediverse, such as if an instance had a blanket “all rights belong to the user posting the content”.

    These laws exist, if companies can use them then so can we

    • I_Has_A_Hat@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      where companies can’t sell an LLM product with copyrighted training data.

      If an artist learns their technique from copying other artists until they are competent enough to produce their own original works, should they be banned from selling their original work or services? After all, they used copyrighted training data to gain the skills needed to produce said work and services.

      • BURN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        LLMS and Generative AI do not learn like humans and regulating it the same would be disingenuous and completely off base.