Re:Stable Diffusion copyright lawsuits could be a legal eart...
by celeritascelery on Monday April 03, 2023 @09:54AM
(#35423581)
I think copyright is a real world counter example to this kind of argument (that raw economics will override the legal protection). If you are selling anything, you have to respect copyright. So if training on copyrighted images becomes illegal, it doesn’t mean that people won’t be able to create stable diffusion models (they will do it regardless). But it does mean that businesses won’t be able to use them, which removes almost all financial benefits from creating them.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Stable Diffusion copyright lawsuits could be a legal eart...
by mywittyname on Monday April 03, 2023 @10:15AM
(#35423933)
Proof both ways is difficult. How will a company prove that an image was generated with an illegally-trained model? Unless there becomes some requirement that models be kept around for a century.
Re:Stable Diffusion copyright lawsuits could be a legal eart...
by shagie on Monday April 03, 2023 @10:28AM
(#35424139)
They can't. They can make it easier to sue the creator of a work for infringing on existing art or characters ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_protection_for_ficti... ) used in the work.