We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training data

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by partiallypro on Tuesday March 14, 2023 @10:28PM (#35162971)

There will be tons of lawsuits in the next decade over the data AI is using to generate its responses. Some of the most blatant and easy to prove have been in image generation with them literally including blurred Getty logos with their output.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by Zuiii on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @01:50AM (#35164402)

Are the blurry getty logos imposed on backdrops from getty as well? I think what's happening here is that the AI is treating this feature like any other feature (table, nose, paperclip) and included it because it assumed the context was appropriate for it.

On the otherhand, if the AI can be coxed into producing nearly complete getty image with only minor modifications, then maybe there would be grounds for a copyright lawsuit.

I think AI detractors should focus on passing new laws. Copyright is not the right tool for this.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by lambertsimnel on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @04:06AM (#35165255)

That's an interesting point, but I wonder whether Getty could sue on other grounds, such as trademark infringement

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:We can't all use AI. Someone has to generate the training... by whywhywhywhy on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @09:09AM (#35167766)

Getty are going to be one of the biggest investors in the space if they’re smart. Why pay photographers when you already have the dataset to create them on demand.

[ Parent | on HN ]