Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Vice)   Fair use or copyright infringement? If an AI eats your painting, is it still yours? Put aside for a moment that one of the defendants call themselves deviants   (vice.com) divider line
27
    More: Interesting, Copyright, Law, Lawsuit, Artificial intelligence, Intellectual property, Tool, Internet, Fair use  
•       •       •

337 clicks; posted to Discussion » on 03 Feb 2023 at 9:35 AM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



27 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
Xcott [TotalFark]
2023-02-03 8:24:44 AM  
Well, how did the AI get a copy of the painting in the first place?  Wouldn't that require at least one act of direct infringement?

In fact, that's exactly how the recording industry took down MP3.com for their "CD beaming" service.  Instead of getting lost in arguments about whether beaming was fair use, they just went after the giant act of direct infringement necessary to make their database in the first place.
 
Somaticasual [TotalFark]
2023-02-03 10:04:24 AM  
AI needs to use a database of permitted works. That should be the final line.
If AI was permitted to use copyrighted works against their owners' permission, then the individual(s) putting together the image db should be sued accordingly. If they just let it loose on google without any qualms about using copyrighted materials, then treble the damages because they knew copyright infringement was a near-guaranteed side effect.
 
Joe USer [recently expired TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-03 10:51:46 AM  
I think AI art is a creative dead end. But that's not going to stop people from trying to use it.

Can you copyright learning from viewing a picture available publicly? Maybe. This is one of those situations where copyright law is going to need some editing.

Can you copyright the metadata? In a database, heck yeah. Go after that while congress tries to fix the first issue. It might take a while.
 
NeoCortex42 [TotalFark]
2023-02-03 11:00:12 AM  
Is it that much different of an argument than the likes of Warhol riffing on someone else's existing art?

I guess it depends on how substantially the resulting work differs from the original.  I have no idea how to codify that in any meaningful way other than the useless "I'll know it when I see it" type of distinction.
 
Dromaeosaur
2023-02-03 11:30:00 AM  
If a commercial product scraped your art without your permission for the purposes of making money for someone else, that seems like the definition of copyright infringement. The only reason they did this with visual art is because they don't have the equivalent of the RIAA ready to sue the makers into oblivion.

And before someone compares AI art to influences and references, the artist still has to do actual work to pull off something in another's style. There's still a process involved that requires skill. You don't just swap a word and get Bill Watterson's style instead of James Gurney's.
 
Sasquach
2023-02-03 11:42:51 AM  
Copyright infringement.
AI isn't a natural person.
Next.
 
Marcus Aurelius [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-03 11:51:26 AM  
The vast majority of AI is trained on stuff owned by someone else.  Repackaging it for sale elsewhere as AI is just theft with more steps.
 
Noah_Tall
2023-02-03 12:01:12 PM  
Hey artist.  Did you create your own distinct style or did you copy elements of other artists styles because you thought it was neat?  If the latter then you should pay each of those original artists every time you create art.

Seriously look at the artists who are complaining. You will recognize their style as having been heavily influenced by other popular art. Usually it's some animation style like Disney or Gibli.  Zero difference. They are profiting by copying a style someone else created.
 
Dromaeosaur
2023-02-03 12:04:45 PM  

Noah_Tall: Hey artist.  Did you create your own distinct style or did you copy elements of other artists styles because you thought it was neat?  If the latter then you should pay each of those original artists every time you create art.

Seriously look at the artists who are complaining. You will recognize their style as having been heavily influenced by other popular art. Usually it's some animation style like Disney or Gibli.  Zero difference. They are profiting by copying a style someone else created.


Again, that still requires actual work and actual talent. An artist can't just think "Gibli" to themselves and immediately be able to ape the style.
 
Noah_Tall
2023-02-03 12:15:47 PM  

Dromaeosaur: Noah_Tall: Hey artist.  Did you create your own distinct style or did you copy elements of other artists styles because you thought it was neat?  If the latter then you should pay each of those original artists every time you create art.

Seriously look at the artists who are complaining. You will recognize their style as having been heavily influenced by other popular art. Usually it's some animation style like Disney or Gibli.  Zero difference. They are profiting by copying a style someone else created.

Again, that still requires actual work and actual talent. An artist can't just think "Gibli" to themselves and immediately be able to ape the style.


It doesn't matter. They are still copying somebody else's style and often characters. "Avengers if done in the style of Disney"

Lots of things aren't hand welded or assembled any more. Somebody with likely zero machining talent grabs a piece off an assembly line, puts it in place, and pushes that tells the robot to weld or rivet it.  Are the companies who use those robots stealing from the people in China who do it by hand?  You make a cake from a Betty Crocker box. Are Betty and you stealing from the people who learned to bake from scratch?  Are artists who use digital tablets to simulate brushstrokes stealing from artists who actually use brushes?
 
MelGoesOnTour
2023-02-03 12:18:47 PM  

Noah_Tall: Dromaeosaur: Noah_Tall: Hey artist.  Did you create your own distinct style or did you copy elements of other artists styles because you thought it was neat?  If the latter then you should pay each of those original artists every time you create art.

Seriously look at the artists who are complaining. You will recognize their style as having been heavily influenced by other popular art. Usually it's some animation style like Disney or Gibli.  Zero difference. They are profiting by copying a style someone else created.

Again, that still requires actual work and actual talent. An artist can't just think "Gibli" to themselves and immediately be able to ape the style.

It doesn't matter. They are still copying somebody else's style and often characters. "Avengers if done in the style of Disney"

Lots of things aren't hand welded or assembled any more. Somebody with likely zero machining talent grabs a piece off an assembly line, puts it in place, and pushes that tells the robot to weld or rivet it.  Are the companies who use those robots stealing from the people in China who do it by hand?  You make a cake from a Betty Crocker box. Are Betty and you stealing from the people who learned to bake from scratch?  Are artists who use digital tablets to simulate brushstrokes stealing from artists who actually use brushes?


That's a silly argument right there.
 
Dromaeosaur
2023-02-03 12:35:17 PM  

MelGoesOnTour: Noah_Tall: Dromaeosaur: Noah_Tall: Hey artist.  Did you create your own distinct style or did you copy elements of other artists styles because you thought it was neat?  If the latter then you should pay each of those original artists every time you create art.

Seriously look at the artists who are complaining. You will recognize their style as having been heavily influenced by other popular art. Usually it's some animation style like Disney or Gibli.  Zero difference. They are profiting by copying a style someone else created.

Again, that still requires actual work and actual talent. An artist can't just think "Gibli" to themselves and immediately be able to ape the style.

It doesn't matter. They are still copying somebody else's style and often characters. "Avengers if done in the style of Disney"

Lots of things aren't hand welded or assembled any more. Somebody with likely zero machining talent grabs a piece off an assembly line, puts it in place, and pushes that tells the robot to weld or rivet it.  Are the companies who use those robots stealing from the people in China who do it by hand?  You make a cake from a Betty Crocker box. Are Betty and you stealing from the people who learned to bake from scratch?  Are artists who use digital tablets to simulate brushstrokes stealing from artists who actually use brushes?

That's a silly argument right there.


Incredibly. Almost impressive in its inanity.

I'd have some respect if the AI folks just came out and said they wanted the output without putting in the work. All these high-minded faux-idealist arguments they come up with after the fact aren't fooling anybody.
 
Noah_Tall
2023-02-03 12:51:47 PM  

Dromaeosaur: MelGoesOnTour: Noah_Tall: Dromaeosaur: Noah_Tall: Hey artist.  Did you create your own distinct style or did you copy elements of other artists styles because you thought it was neat?  If the latter then you should pay each of those original artists every time you create art.

Seriously look at the artists who are complaining. You will recognize their style as having been heavily influenced by other popular art. Usually it's some animation style like Disney or Gibli.  Zero difference. They are profiting by copying a style someone else created.

Again, that still requires actual work and actual talent. An artist can't just think "Gibli" to themselves and immediately be able to ape the style.

It doesn't matter. They are still copying somebody else's style and often characters. "Avengers if done in the style of Disney"

Lots of things aren't hand welded or assembled any more. Somebody with likely zero machining talent grabs a piece off an assembly line, puts it in place, and pushes that tells the robot to weld or rivet it.  Are the companies who use those robots stealing from the people in China who do it by hand?  You make a cake from a Betty Crocker box. Are Betty and you stealing from the people who learned to bake from scratch?  Are artists who use digital tablets to simulate brushstrokes stealing from artists who actually use brushes?

That's a silly argument right there.

Incredibly. Almost impressive in its inanity.

I'd have some respect if the AI folks just came out and said they wanted the output without putting in the work. All these high-minded faux-idealist arguments they come up with after the fact aren't fooling anybody.


In every single instance ever

EVERY

SINGLE

INSTANCE

Where companies started using machinery to take over jobs that were previously performed by hand the original craftsmen screamed that those companies were stealing food from their children's mouths. Were driving them into poverty. Were making a mockery of the craft that they had spent years perfecting.  This is no different and anybody who thinks it is can count idiocy among their attributes. Do you really think it takes less talent to weave or sew or carve by hand than it does to paint by hand?  Which means that clothing manufacturers are stealing the hard work of those few people who do the work by hand right?

It would be different if the AI was actually stealing identifiable pieces from artwork.  If it exactly copied a little girl from a painting and put her in an exact copy of a boat from another painting with a lake from another painting and a moon from yet another painting.  It doesn't, it just copies style. And it didn't require years of training?  Really?  You think the programmers who wrote the AI just randomly typed lines and it magically came into existence?
 
Dromaeosaur
2023-02-03 1:08:06 PM  

Noah_Tall: Dromaeosaur: MelGoesOnTour: Noah_Tall: Dromaeosaur: Noah_Tall: Hey artist.  Did you create your own distinct style or did you copy elements of other artists styles because you thought it was neat?  If the latter then you should pay each of those original artists every time you create art.

Seriously look at the artists who are complaining. You will recognize their style as having been heavily influenced by other popular art. Usually it's some animation style like Disney or Gibli.  Zero difference. They are profiting by copying a style someone else created.

Again, that still requires actual work and actual talent. An artist can't just think "Gibli" to themselves and immediately be able to ape the style.

It doesn't matter. They are still copying somebody else's style and often characters. "Avengers if done in the style of Disney"

Lots of things aren't hand welded or assembled any more. Somebody with likely zero machining talent grabs a piece off an assembly line, puts it in place, and pushes that tells the robot to weld or rivet it.  Are the companies who use those robots stealing from the people in China who do it by hand?  You make a cake from a Betty Crocker box. Are Betty and you stealing from the people who learned to bake from scratch?  Are artists who use digital tablets to simulate brushstrokes stealing from artists who actually use brushes?

That's a silly argument right there.

Incredibly. Almost impressive in its inanity.

I'd have some respect if the AI folks just came out and said they wanted the output without putting in the work. All these high-minded faux-idealist arguments they come up with after the fact aren't fooling anybody.

In every single instance ever

EVERY

SINGLE

INSTANCE

Where companies started using machinery to take over jobs that were previously performed by hand the original craftsmen screamed that those companies were stealing food from their children's mouths. Were driving them into poverty. Were making a mockery of the craft th ...


I'd argue back but I honestly don't even think you believe what you're saying. You're just trying to make "I want free shiat without putting in the work." sound like it's something other than just a selfish money grab.
 
Russell_Secord
2023-02-03 1:16:18 PM  
Ask yourself this one question. When the machines come for your job--and they will, sooner or later--do you want some kind of protection in place so you don't end up on the street? You'll have to do something when your job is gone, and if the machines are doing everything, you'll be redundant.
 
Joe USer [recently expired TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-03 4:03:02 PM  

Dromaeosaur: Noah_Tall: Dromaeosaur: MelGoesOnTour: Noah_Tall: Dromaeosaur: Noah_Tall: Hey artist.  Did you create your own distinct style or did you copy elements of other artists styles because you thought it was neat?  If the latter then you should pay each of those original artists every time you create art.

Seriously look at the artists who are complaining. You will recognize their style as having been heavily influenced by other popular art. Usually it's some animation style like Disney or Gibli.  Zero difference. They are profiting by copying a style someone else created.

Again, that still requires actual work and actual talent. An artist can't just think "Gibli" to themselves and immediately be able to ape the style.

It doesn't matter. They are still copying somebody else's style and often characters. "Avengers if done in the style of Disney"

Lots of things aren't hand welded or assembled any more. Somebody with likely zero machining talent grabs a piece off an assembly line, puts it in place, and pushes that tells the robot to weld or rivet it.  Are the companies who use those robots stealing from the people in China who do it by hand?  You make a cake from a Betty Crocker box. Are Betty and you stealing from the people who learned to bake from scratch?  Are artists who use digital tablets to simulate brushstrokes stealing from artists who actually use brushes?

That's a silly argument right there.

Incredibly. Almost impressive in its inanity.

I'd have some respect if the AI folks just came out and said they wanted the output without putting in the work. All these high-minded faux-idealist arguments they come up with after the fact aren't fooling anybody.

In every single instance ever

EVERY

SINGLE

INSTANCE

Where companies started using machinery to take over jobs that were previously performed by hand the original craftsmen screamed that those companies were stealing food from their children's mouths. Were driving them into poverty. Were making a mockery of the craft th ...

I'd argue back but I honestly don't even think you believe what you're saying. You're just trying to make "I want free shiat without putting in the work." sound like it's something other than just a selfish money grab.


I think it's a money grab, but I disagree that they didn't do any work. I think they did quite a bit of work and used tremendous amounts of resources.
 
gunther_bumpass
2023-02-03 4:36:23 PM  

Noah_Tall: Dromaeosaur: MelGoesOnTour: Noah_Tall: Dromaeosaur: Noah_Tall: Hey artist.  Did you create your own distinct style or did you copy elements of other artists styles because you thought it was neat?  If the latter then you should pay each of those original artists every time you create art.

Seriously look at the artists who are complaining. You will recognize their style as having been heavily influenced by other popular art. Usually it's some animation style like Disney or Gibli.  Zero difference. They are profiting by copying a style someone else created.

Again, that still requires actual work and actual talent. An artist can't just think "Gibli" to themselves and immediately be able to ape the style.

It doesn't matter. They are still copying somebody else's style and often characters. "Avengers if done in the style of Disney"

Lots of things aren't hand welded or assembled any more. Somebody with likely zero machining talent grabs a piece off an assembly line, puts it in place, and pushes that tells the robot to weld or rivet it.  Are the companies who use those robots stealing from the people in China who do it by hand?  You make a cake from a Betty Crocker box. Are Betty and you stealing from the people who learned to bake from scratch?  Are artists who use digital tablets to simulate brushstrokes stealing from artists who actually use brushes?

That's a silly argument right there.

Incredibly. Almost impressive in its inanity.

I'd have some respect if the AI folks just came out and said they wanted the output without putting in the work. All these high-minded faux-idealist arguments they come up with after the fact aren't fooling anybody.

In every single instance ever

EVERY

SINGLE

INSTANCE

Where companies started using machinery to take over jobs that were previously performed by hand the original craftsmen screamed that those companies were stealing food from their children's mouths. Were driving them into poverty. Were making a mockery of the craft th ...


I'd like the shiattiest take you have...

No... that's too shiatty. 


Sorry you can't be creative.
 
Dromaeosaur
2023-02-03 4:39:25 PM  

Russell_Secord: Ask yourself this one question. When the machines come for your job--and they will, sooner or later--do you want some kind of protection in place so you don't end up on the street? You'll have to do something when your job is gone, and if the machines are doing everything, you'll be redundant.


I don't think my fellow programmers realize it'll be coming for our jobs soon enough. Github Copilot wasn't purely for our benefit.
 
Joe USer [recently expired TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-03 5:18:19 PM  

Dromaeosaur: Russell_Secord: Ask yourself this one question. When the machines come for your job--and they will, sooner or later--do you want some kind of protection in place so you don't end up on the street? You'll have to do something when your job is gone, and if the machines are doing everything, you'll be redundant.

I don't think my fellow programmers realize it'll be coming for our jobs soon enough. Github Copilot wasn't purely for our benefit.


5 to 7 years at this rate. With a 10 year overlap of fixing bad AI code.
 
Dromaeosaur
2023-02-03 5:26:04 PM  

Joe USer: Dromaeosaur: Russell_Secord: Ask yourself this one question. When the machines come for your job--and they will, sooner or later--do you want some kind of protection in place so you don't end up on the street? You'll have to do something when your job is gone, and if the machines are doing everything, you'll be redundant.

I don't think my fellow programmers realize it'll be coming for our jobs soon enough. Github Copilot wasn't purely for our benefit.

5 to 7 years at this rate. With a 10 year overlap of fixing bad AI code.


It's kind of scary. You start writing some code and it goes "Hey! Looks like you're setting up an API endpoint!" *writes out blank methods for everything and sets up routing*
 
Serious Post on Serious Thread
2023-02-03 6:15:24 PM  
All art is scraped.
 
4NTLRZ
2023-02-03 6:20:31 PM  
I mean, c'mon! Who doesn't want their own copy of...
American Gothic
Fark user imageView Full Size

The Mona Lisa
Fark user imageView Full Size

or Chimpanzee Riding On A Segue?
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Joe USer [recently expired TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-03 6:20:52 PM  

Dromaeosaur: Joe USer: Dromaeosaur: Russell_Secord: Ask yourself this one question. When the machines come for your job--and they will, sooner or later--do you want some kind of protection in place so you don't end up on the street? You'll have to do something when your job is gone, and if the machines are doing everything, you'll be redundant.

I don't think my fellow programmers realize it'll be coming for our jobs soon enough. Github Copilot wasn't purely for our benefit.

5 to 7 years at this rate. With a 10 year overlap of fixing bad AI code.

It's kind of scary. You start writing some code and it goes "Hey! Looks like you're setting up an API endpoint!" *writes out blank methods for everything and sets up routing*


I used ChatGPT and it wrote me a great utility script that worked only once before needing a manual cleanup and reboot.

It's like a junior developer who forgot some of the basics. It will get betterrr.
 
psychosis_inducing
2023-02-03 7:32:41 PM  

Dromaeosaur: Joe USer: Dromaeosaur: Russell_Secord: Ask yourself this one question. When the machines come for your job--and they will, sooner or later--do you want some kind of protection in place so you don't end up on the street? You'll have to do something when your job is gone, and if the machines are doing everything, you'll be redundant.

I don't think my fellow programmers realize it'll be coming for our jobs soon enough. Github Copilot wasn't purely for our benefit.

5 to 7 years at this rate. With a 10 year overlap of fixing bad AI code.

It's kind of scary. You start writing some code and it goes "Hey! Looks like you're setting up an API endpoint!" *writes out blank methods for everything and sets up routing*


On a more petty note, I wonder what will replace "learn to code" as the go-to phrase for idiots blaming people for systemic underpayment.
 
toraque [TotalFark] [OhFark]
2023-02-03 7:33:02 PM  

Dromaeosaur: Russell_Secord: Ask yourself this one question. When the machines come for your job--and they will, sooner or later--do you want some kind of protection in place so you don't end up on the street? You'll have to do something when your job is gone, and if the machines are doing everything, you'll be redundant.

I don't think my fellow programmers realize it'll be coming for our jobs soon enough. Github Copilot wasn't purely for our benefit.


I'm already having people bringing me code samples that ChatGPT did. Apparently, if the task is simple enough, it's easier for some people to ask AI to write something than it is to figure it out themselves.

The programming jobs of the future are going to be the people that get paid to ask AI to write code, and the people that have to fix those shiatty code segments and work them together into some kind of architecture. It's not all that different from working with an outsourcing corp now as it is.
 
willwall
2023-02-04 10:09:00 AM  

Somaticasual: AI needs to use a database of permitted works. That should be the final line.
If AI was permitted to use copyrighted works against their owners' permission, then the individual(s) putting together the image db should be sued accordingly. If they just let it loose on google without any qualms about using copyrighted materials, then treble the damages because they knew copyright infringement was a near-guaranteed side effect.


Should fanfic have to pay royalties too? Does greta van fleet owe zeppelin royalties since they're clearly a major influence? What about any textbooks that show more modern works that influence new artists? Using one work as inspiration for another is entirely normal use. Picasso is even quoted as saying "good artists borrow, great artists steal." It's a good thing. It how we got things like the impressionist movement and jazz.

The moral questions are a cover for the real issue. Economic viability. If I can create the exact art I want with a couple of prompts and a website I'm not going to pay a bunch of money to buy a work from a painter.  That means an artist will be out of work. If I were an artist I'd be pissed too. Just like I'm sure oil lamp manufacturers and buggy drivers were pissed when the industrial revolution happened. But it's here, it's not going anywhere and rather than fight it they'll need to adapt to figure out how to leverage it.

And it's not just art, that's just the first front of this change. All of our incomes are going to be affected by AI. We're all going to have to adapt.
 
willwall
2023-02-04 10:09:56 AM  

Dromaeosaur: If a commercial product scraped your art without your permission for the purposes of making money for someone else, that seems like the definition of copyright infringement. The only reason they did this with visual art is because they don't have the equivalent of the RIAA ready to sue the makers into oblivion.

And before someone compares AI art to influences and references, the artist still has to do actual work to pull off something in another's style. There's still a process involved that requires skill. You don't just swap a word and get Bill Watterson's style instead of James Gurney's.


You don't think it took incredible skill and work to program that AI?
 
Displayed 27 of 27 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

More Farking, less working

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.