Technology

Abolish copyright.

Oh, so when a ai company wants to use copyrighted works without permission or compensation it's "fair use" but when I do it, it's "piracy" and "I need to leave before the cops are called".

Great AI gets more rights than us too!

If copyright had a reasonable duration, a huge chunk of that would have been public domain and not an issue.

Say what you will, but "I Glued My Balls to My Butthole (Again)" fucking slaps.

they're right, they should absolutely be allowed to use and profit off of other peoples work that they spent decades learning and perfecting

(this is sarcasm in case you can't tell they're dumb as fuck for saying that shut this company down today pls)

Just tried it out out of curiosity. It does a good job, but the music is still boring.

One of the four fair use factors is the portion of the copyrighted work that was taken. For a finding of fair use under this factor, the infringing work must only take the amount of copyrighted material needed for the infringing work's purpose.

If they ripped every single file they have access to, there's no way to be found as fair use under this factor. If they argue they were using a curated list of only the works they needed to develop their model it could be fair use, but admitting to taking every possible work in their entirety is a surefire way to fail a fair use defense.

Lmao, fair use... Fuck off with that in this case

Imagine how many years of prison would get an individual if he admitted in court to pirate tens of millions of music files in order to make a profit

Why would the "AI" know about it and not just make that up though? But also, if companies can use everything on the internet as a "fair use" thing, then so should people. No more bullying of people making stuff you don't like / agree with.

There's nothing stopping you from going to youtube, listening to a bunch of hit country songs there, and using that inspiration to write a "hit country song about getting your balls caught in a screen door". That music was free to access, and your ability to create derivative works is fully protected by copyright law.

So if that's what the AI is doing, then it would be fully legal if it was a person. The question courts are trying to figure out is if AI should be treated like people when it comes to "learning" and creating derivative works.

I think there are good arguments to both sides of that issue. The big advantage of ruling against AI having those rights is that it means that record labels and other rights holders can get compensation for their content being used. The main disadvantage is that high cost barriers to training material will kill off open-source and small company AI, guaranteeing that generative AI is fully controlled by tech giant companies like Google, Microsoft, and Adobe.

I think the best legal outcome is one that attempts to protect both: companies and individuals below a certain revenue threshold (or other scale metrics) can freely train on the open web, but are required to track what was used for training. As they grow, there will be different tiers where they're required to start paying for the content their model was trained on. Obviously this solution needs a lot of work before being a viable option, but I think something similar to this is the best way to both have competition in the AI space and make sure people get compensated.

It's pretty obvious if you get specific with the tags. Especially with older styles where there's less available trianing data.

If you post stuff online for people to view it, don’t be surprised when computer see it too.