Most argue training with copyrighted data is fair use.

AI companies have all kinds of arguments against paying for copyrighted content::The companies building generative AI tools like ChatGPT say updated copyright laws could interfere with their ability to train capable AI models. Here are comments from OpenAI, StabilityAI, Meta, Google, Microsoft and more.

  • HelloThere@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    3·
    8 months ago

    I don’t recall the last time a human was able to create something that could not be expressed in previously existing words at all.

    It’s called outsider art.

    Even if AI only trained on non-copyrighted art, this would still be true. It might set the AI companies back a year or two

    If this is true then they have no excuse to continue to consume copywritten content. Given the extreme pushback from the companies involved, I think is clear that this isn’t true.

    • 𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠@programming.devEnglish
      1·
      8 months ago

      Outsider art can be explained using words. It’s certainly strange art, but not necessarily something that’s “unpromptable”.

      AI companies mostly push back because dealing with copyright is very expensive, not because it would necessarily take a very long time. Google and Microsoft likely already have a sizeable library of copyright-free art they could use, but using everything is just more efficient and much, much cheaper.