Artificial intelligence firm Anthropic hits out at copyright lawsuit filed by music publishing corporations, claiming the content ingested into its models falls under ‘fair use’ and that any licensing regime created to manage its use of copyrighted material in training data would be too complex and costly to work in practice
GenAI tools ‘could not exist’ if firms are made to pay copyright::undefined
I see way too many people advocating for copyright. I understand in this case it benefits big companies rather than consumers, but if you disagree with copyright, as I do, you should be consistent.
You don’t have to be against copyright, as such. Fair Use is part of copyright law. It exists to prevent copyrights from being abused against the interests of the general public.
I hate the MAGMA companies as much as anyone, but AI such as LLMs, especially the open source stuff Facebook and Stable diffusion is making, is beneficial to us all.
I see way too many people advocating for copyright. I understand in this case it benefits big companies rather than consumers, but if you disagree with copyright, as I do, you should be consistent.
You don’t have to be against copyright, as such. Fair Use is part of copyright law. It exists to prevent copyrights from being abused against the interests of the general public.
But I am against any copyright beyond forcing attribution to the original creator.
…which AI fails to do.
Here’s your works cited for any generative AI:
AI creators, at least the open source ones, are usually pretty open about where they got the training data for their model
Copyright law should benefit humans, not machines, not corporations. And no, corporations are not people. Anthony Kennedy can get bent.
I hate the MAGMA companies as much as anyone, but AI such as LLMs, especially the open source stuff Facebook and Stable diffusion is making, is beneficial to us all.
Abolishing copyright in the way that allows for the existence of Gen AI benefits people far more than it does corpos
Well said.