Hendrik Proosa wrote: But Marvel isn't interested in coming after Little Timmy who likes spiderman and puts his illustrations to Timmy Art gallery either, unless little Timmy tries to sell them or step on Marvel's feet in other ways.
This isn't about little Timmy and his experiments. We're talking about implementing this tech in a professional software where people use it to make money.
Hendrik Proosa wrote:Problem with your books example is that it assumes these new books sold at cheaper price are the same books. They aren't.
But in my example they really are. If you take a book , scan it and change the font used inside, is it not the same book just because its "written" in a different way visually? Or if you change some words with their synonyms its ok? Because this is what this "Ai" is doing.
There's a difference between a human imitating something and a piece of software that
literally scans other people's work and reshuffles it. If it spat things out of thin air then ok, but its not.
Hendrik Proosa wrote:Would you be also happy if Shutterstock banned repetitive "art" content where people rip off each others style in drawing, illustration and videography? "Your stock footage submission was removed because we already have a sunny day with palmtrees beach wide angle cinematic shot".
They already do that and I'm happy for it.
Hendrik Proosa wrote:
Most of the "art" people produce is neither original nor artistic and they are angry because it turns out their craft is something a dumb box under desk can do in seconds. Clients really don't care if someone sweats over their dog grooming business logo for weeks or they get it by button push if results are indifferentiable.
None of the artists that are "angry" about it gave their permission for this piece of software to forcefully scan their stuff. It doesn't matter if you think their stuff was original or artistic or if that dumb box spits it out in a second. The OpenAI people surely think it was artistic since they used it.
Its like going to a movie set as a visitor, using your dumb box of a camera that spits out things in seconds (that you hid from the security guard), record everything that's going on, reshuffle it when you get home and then sell it because "its not 100% like they did it, its just similar and they haven't caught me so its ok".
Where do you draw the line? Its ok to steal stuff because its digital and no harm done and "no one cares" (the clients) or how does this work?
I get that Marvel would be safe, but what about the guy where his livelihood depends on selling his awful non artistic art that this bot blatantly stole and reshuffled?
Why does the bot /model / etc need to steal it / scan it / read it in the first place if its soo amazing?
Or is it ok if it only affects those loser artists? What happens when these corporations come for the rest? Musicians, Web Coders, Developers and so on?