Re:Copyright liability for generative AI pivots on fair use ...
by tivert on Monday September 25, 2023 @03:20PM
(#37649134)
> This is a digression. There are use cases other than creating competing books, do I need to actually list them out?
Are the generative models crippled to only be able to do those things?
And some of the things you list are also likely to be in direct competition with the original works (e.g. "Summarizing news.") I believe "AI" generated news sites are already a thing (e.g. plagiarizing/summarizing original news articles, so another party can generate ad-revenue from them).
> Do I need to cite the math textbook that I used to learn algebra when I write a book on calculus?
No, because I previously said: "...generative AI systems aren't people, so I think it's totally fair to not grant their operators rights by analogy to something a human [mind] would do."
Are the generative models crippled to only be able to do those things?
And some of the things you list are also likely to be in direct competition with the original works (e.g. "Summarizing news.") I believe "AI" generated news sites are already a thing (e.g. plagiarizing/summarizing original news articles, so another party can generate ad-revenue from them).
> Do I need to cite the math textbook that I used to learn algebra when I write a book on calculus?
No, because I previously said: "...generative AI systems aren't people, so I think it's totally fair to not grant their operators rights by analogy to something a human [mind] would do."