this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
47 points (66.7% liked)

Technology

59390 readers
2904 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
47
Training Generative AI Models on Copyrighted Works Is Fair Use - Change My Mind (mastodon.lawprofs.org)
submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
112 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I fucked with the title a bit. What i linked to was actually a mastodon post linking to an actual thing. but in my defense, i found it because cory doctorow boosted it, so, in a way, i am providing the original source here.

please argue. please do not remove.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

please cite that for me, if you have 3 seconds.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I have to admit, I did not realize that bare copyright infringement could be criminal, but it also requires criminal intent, so any defense lawyer would argue there was a fair use intent, and even if the civil matter were decided against the defendant, surely the criminal matter would be dropped.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The prosecuting lawyer would argue the intent was in fact criminal and not fair use.

You can't just state "I had a fair use intent", you state your intent (e.g. selling an AI model that creates content for financial gain) and the court determines if that intent was criminal or fair use. And considering criminal copyright law is intended to prevent others from financially profiting from your work, this can be construed as criminal intent. So I would not be so sure that the criminal matter would be dropped so easily.

Of course in this specific case, there's a bit of a grey area, so the first case would not have criminal intent. But if ruled against the AI companies, subsequent cases could argue criminal intent as the AI companies should know by then that what they're doing isn't allowed.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

so where do these say my use is not fair use?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Moving the goal posts again, I see.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

fair use is where we started

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

surely you see the difference between a crime and a tort, now.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Here's the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:

Criminal copyright laws prohibit the unacknowledged use of another's intellectual property for the purpose of financial gain. Violation of these laws can lead to fines and jail time. Criminal copyright laws have been a part of U. S. laws since 1897, which added a misdemeanor penalty for unlawful performances if "willful and for profit".

^to^ ^opt^ ^out^^,^ ^pm^ ^me^ ^'optout'.^ ^article^ ^|^ ^about^