✍️ Hobbyist Writer, 🎲 Role player, 🧩 Game master, 🚀 Sci-Fi enthusiast, 💫 Star Citizen 🇪🇺 EU Citizen, 🐧🦊 Linux user, 🧑‍💻 Professional Software Developer, 🏳️‍🌈 they/them

  • 0 Posts
  • 577 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 22nd, 2024

help-circle












  • Let’s look at music. If a musician loses their arms and can no longer play an instrument, but instead dictates the chords to someone else to play, who is the artist? Who can claim ownership of the piece?

    Then that musician becomes the composer who can copyright the sheet music. The one who plays the chords becomes the performing artist and can copyright the performance.

    Spoken like someone who has never used an LLM before and thinks it magically produces exactly what you want on the first time, every time.

    I have used LLMs extensively, several versions and types. I know how that shit works. And no I do not think that its results are deterministic and accurate.

    Mine is that the tool is the LLM, and that when art is created with it, it should be open to copyright.

    The LLM is the “artist” as it produces the image. And you can’t claim copyright for someone else.


  • In the same way, the company that created the LLM may protect their work

    What does the company protect here? The system, or the model? Which the latter being ill-gotten by scraping already copyrighted content?

    Who drew the art is of no import when the artist isn’t a sentient lifeform

    It was an allegory. The supposed artist is the commissioner and the LLM being the artist. And since you can’t copyright something you didn’t made, well tough luck getting copyright on AI slop.

    By your definition, a photographer cannot own a picture because the camera captured it.

    No, because as a photographer you hold the tool in your hand. You can adjust everything, even the subject. And its all in your own control and it takes your skill in managing it to shoot the perfect photo.

    If we would take your interpretation of my definition, then nobody can own anything since they always have to use a tool to create something.



  • You can copyright a combination of words, though, and it was his unique combination that created the art

    so its literature, then?

    The artist doesn’t copyright the palette, and the shop that sold the pigments holds no ownership over the painting.

    Sure, the artist doesn’t copyright a palette, or the shop does not hold ownership of pigments. But Companies do patent pigments.

    If the art is created with paint, pixels, or phrase, the final product belongs to the artist, and so should be protected by law for them.

    If you commission an Art piece, with a detailed description of what it should display. The artist comes back to you with a draft, you tell them to adjust here and there, and you finally after several rounds of drafting got the commissioned art piece. Did you draw it?

    Thats what LLMs do and nothing else.