Re:Stable-Audio-Demo
by sillysaurusx on Tuesday February 13, 2024 @09:21PM
(#39365597)
I’m sympathetic, but currently the courts don’t agree. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39364447
Morals are different from the law, but you seek a legal remedy, and those aren’t going well.
Re:Stable-Audio-Demo
by throw10920 on Wednesday February 14, 2024 @07:44PM
(#39377684)
Doesn't the Ars Technica article of that post state that the courts have not rejected the claim of copyright infringement?
> failed to provide evidence supporting any of their claims except for direct copyright infringement
(emphasis mine)
Where are the courts saying that models can be trained on copyrighted content? (I believe that it's possible but unless I'm missing something I don't see it in that Ars article)
I don't think this is true. There's a huge amount of public domain works, as well as stuff licensed under permissive copyleft licenses, that can be used.
But, even if it did kill off open-source ML, it would still be necessary, because it's morally wrong to train ML models on copyrighted content without compensating the copyright owners (on their terms).
As a content creator, I explicitly do not want or consent to any of my creative works being used to train ML models without having a licensing agreement through which I am financially compensated.