News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Invasive Diffusion: one unwilling illustrator found her turned into an AI model. Parent comment

Re:Invasive Diffusion: one unwilling illustrator found her t... by yoz-y on Wednesday November 02, 2022 @06:55AM (#33433846)
> Legally it seems pretty clear nothing wrong is being done here.

It most certainly doesn’t. Just because a human can eyeball an art style and copy it eventually, does not translate into “I can take your copyrighted work and feed it to a machine”. Ethically you may argue one way or the other, but legally you are using somebody’s else’s work without permission.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Invasive Diffusion: one unwilling illustrator found her t... by LordDragonfang on Wednesday November 02, 2022 @12:52PM (#33438929)
The machine in question is the human brain.

And besides, there's nothing illegal about "using" a copyrighted work without permission (for example, if artist wanted to use the pixel values in an image for a color pallet, that's totally fine), only reproducing it - which no image generation model does.

[ Parent | on HN ]