Mind you, this is not talking about the usage rights of images generated from such a model, that's a completely different story and a legal one.
hear hear...
> Passively training a model on an artwork does not change the art in the slightest
copyright holders, I mean individual authors, people who actually produced the content being used, disagree.
They say AI is like a bulldozer destroying the park to them.
Which technically is true, it's a machine that someone (some interested party maybe?) is trying to disguise as a human, doing human stuff.
But it's not.
> passive, non-destructive
Passive, non-destructive, in this context means
- passive: people send the images to you, you don't go looking for them
- non-destructive: people authorized you, otherwise it's destructive of their rights.