‘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

  • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    any more than a human reading copyrighted material and making a derivative work.

    It seems obvious to me that it’s not doing anything different than a human does when we absorb information and make our own works. I don’t understand why practically nobody understands this

    I’m surprised to have even found one person that agrees with me

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

      Because it’s objectively not true. Humans and ML models fundamentally process information differently and cannot be compared. A model doesn’t “read a book” or “absorb information”

      • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I didn’t say they processed information the same, I said generative AI isn’t doing anything that humans don’t already do. If I make a drawing of Gordon Freeman or Courage the Cowardly Dog, or even a drawing of Gordon Freeman in the style of Courage the Cowardly Dog, I’m not infringing on the copyright of Valve or John Dilworth. (Unless I monetize it, but even then there’s fair use…)

        Or if I read a statistic or some kind of piece of information online and spoke about it online, I’m not infringing the copyright of the author. Or if I listen to hundreds of hours of a podcast and then do a really good impression of one of the hosts online, I’m not infringing on that person’s copyright or stealing their voice.

        Me making that drawing, relaying that information, and doing that impression are all not copyright infringement until I publish them. Generative AI doesn’t publish anything, and even if it did I think there would be a strong case for fair-use for the same reasons humans would have a strong case for fair-use for publishing their derivative works.