Sirs…

So the next thing in piracy is pirating LORAs of characters, celebrities and such?

>>211356791 (OP)
Disney literally pirated The Wicked Witch's design from The Wizard of Oz multiple times

>>211356830
you're assuming they will win, which they won't

>>211356791 (OP)
I mean it is copyright infringement
That’s all Ai is really

>too scared to sue OpenAI, have to sue the mom and pop shop instead
Disney knows they have no case.

>>211356903
any suit against any AI firm is a suit against them all.

the bigger problem is universal is owned by comcast, and comcast has always been vehemently against anything that actually uses bandwidth, and sharing 20-30gb models qualifies. so this is essentially ISP vs ai

>>211356791 (OP)
DeviantArtbros.....are we next?

>>211356903
> >too scared to sue OpenAI, have to sue the mom and pop shop instead
They sue the small guy to create president.

>>211356791 (OP)
Their claim is fairly undeniable.

>>211357053

>your honor, this fraudulent pencil company is creating tools for people to pirate images our intellectual properties

>>211356903
they don't sue OpenAI becaouse they problably use some form of their technology for their own products

>>211356869
Why wouldn't they win? It's pretty cut and dry.

>say for years the only way to stop AI is to outlaw computers
>the madmen are actually trying to do it

>>211356903
going against open ai is wishing to get some of your suits killed to set an example

Unlike other, Midjourney doesn't even make the slightest pretense of trying to avoid copyrighted material. They're dead in the water here.

>>211357105
pencils don't write for you though
comparing tools with AI doesn't make any sense. AI can be a tool, but AI itself is meant to be a fake brain that does specific tasks for you

>>211357348
intentionally telling an ai to draw darth vader is the same thing as intentionally drawing darth vader with a pencil

>>211357392
well shit time to make brains illegal

>>211357392
Good evening, Saar.

>the entertainment industry has been obsolete for almost two decades now
>one of their final acts will be outlawing emergent technology

there is no way this isn't hell.

>>211357506
There is no way these big companies haven’t invested billions in AI and that they don’t use it for their products from now on, so it’s actually worse than what you’re describing, because what they really want to do is restrict its use for ordinary people while they save huge amount of moneys using it

>>211356791 (OP)
Mj user here, Mj sucks hard at genning star wars characters. It doesn't have nearly as large of a training library of copyrighted IPs as Dall3.

>>211357131
Outlawing computers would be based.

>>211357698
well, they have tried to illegalize literally any and every means of democratization of media. its shocking they waited this long to go after ai

>>211357838
outlawing computers for you not for the state

>>211356791 (OP)
We had the chinese pandering last decade, is this the decade of inda pandering movies?

>kill annoying but relatively inoffensive slop
>leave the actual dangerous uses of generative AI (forgery, agitation, surveillance etc) untouched

bravo capitalists

>>211358150
>Whataboutism

>>211358150
[literally everything] for me not for thee

My guess is that the interest in AI from Hollywood is waning because it'll never be as good as it would need to be, so they're cashing out now

>>211358150
Welcome to the Jewish hustle
You were warned that they would do this, but no "muh robot maids, muh prompt movies and vidyas"
Accelerate

>>211358107
We are half way through. Dead decade.

>>211357119
DALLE3 can straight up do a lot of Disney characters out of the box. Why aren't Disney suing OpenAI?

You can't stop 1-shot style transfer no matter you make them pull from training. Whether user input is words or image, it's a reconstitution machine by definition it will reconstitute any style described well enough to it.

>>211358695
This. Openai does copyrighted characters and celebrities much better than mj. The main benefits of mj are lax filters and high speed inpainting.

>>211358342
>company begins taking steps to remove citizen access to a technology because they don’t think it’s good
lol. lmao even. They want it exclusively in the hands of the elite and for you to pay them to have access to anything it generates.

Reminder: Comcast owns universal, AI devours data/bandwidth, if Comcast had its way, the only use for the internet would be text emails

>>211358150
Slop is worse than fraud.

>>211358695
>>211358859
They’re going after a small company in hopes of facing a weak legal defense to establish legal precedents they can use against bigger companies.

>>211358862
>AI devours data/bandwidth
Those darn 600kb files!

The biggest joke here is darth vader’s design is a futurized version of a shogunate era samurai.

>>211358976
Go look at the size of the average model on civitai. Hell, look at the video section.

>>211358695
Because it's directly accessing copyrighted images and storing them in their database

>>211359618
Sue google then

>>211359618
it isn't though. it can generate child pornography without being trained on child pornography. train it on children, train it on porn, and bam it combines them.

>>211357119
>draw superman logo
>pencil company gets sued by DC

Not how it works

>>211359716
heh... you really think its not trained in that stuff huh...

if only you knew...

>>211359737
Are you storing copyrighted materials in your database and using them?

>>211359737
It might if a pencil were capable of drawing on its own.

>>211359791
It can be. It doesn't have to be. It doesn't need to be trained of astronauts surfing on the moon to be able to generate that.

>>211359791
its okay if you don't understand how the technology works, just don't be confidently ignorant.

>>211359801
I'm storing copyrighted material in my brain

>>211359682
The actual correct answer

>in school
>teacher rolls out tv cart
>"okay kids, I'll need your parents Disney account information before we start"

>>211359801
models aren't databases.

>>211358695
Where the FUCK is Zootopia 2 at? Nobody wants this beanmouth beaner literally who trash or remake of a 10 year old trash, we want sexy fucking bun!

>>211356893
Looking at something then drawing it again is not copyright infringement you retarded faggot.

>>211359871
actually they've gone to court to try to get that ruled as copyright infringement.

>>211359851
that's exactly the kind of stuff disneyllenials and nintendrones want

>>211356903
>>211357105
>>211357392
>>211359682
>>211359737
>SARS SARS DO NOT REDEEM THE LAWSUIT SARS
>MY FAKE YOUTUBE TRAILER CHANNEL NEEDS AI SARS

>>211359851
>showing kids the 2019 remake
They should have been fined more than $250

>>211359791
The big models that are online for everyone? No.
Some dude with 4 video cards in his basement training his own? Probably.

>>211359854
They are drawing from databases. Don't be stupid.

>>211360173
"drawing from" isn't copyright infringement. Superheroes as a genre "draw from" copyrighted characters. This is simply how culture has worked, has always worked, and always will work. Copyright doesn't prevent it or even try to.

Generative AI is simply a tool, whether any particular item goes against copyright law says nothing about the tool as a whole.

>>211360235
When I say draw from, I mean they are pulling from, not literally drawing. They are accessing copyrighted materials and stealing them.

>>211360173
Okay, so the lawsuit is refuted by local generation without access to any databases.

There’s already a precedent for this on the books. Can’t remember if it was ibm or xerox, but they patented the first PC bios and would sue anyone who tried to make one of their own, but the code was so simple they could claim any bios infringed on their patents. To get around this you just needed to prove you coded it without access to [whoever]’s hardware.

>>211360235
An image file can be reduced to an algorithm. An algorithm the close enough to copyrighted material infringes under clauses. The llm is an algorithm trained (illegally) on copyrighted data and then reproduces similar data via an algorithm (for profit)

In analogy an llm is just a way of storing various images with dataloss and poor retrieval methods.

>>211357392
Llm is a for profit corp. The equivalent is if you draw vader as your company logo or promotional material etc

>>211360387
Gimme a fuckin break >>211357119

>>211360387
Model is already trained on the data, what does local matter?

>>211360235
>Copyright doesn't prevent it or even try to

Disney has taken the creators of work they deemed derivative of their IP to court, even while Walt was still kicking

>>211360536
Because disney is basically trying to create a legal precedent that makes memory copyright infringement.

>>211360490
Fair use bro.

>>211360390
So looking at an image is copyright infringement.

>>211360601
>>211360760
Why do you retards think a computer program run by a corporation is a person?

>>211360801
Why do you think your brain isn’t a computer?

>>211360839
Because my brain produces qualia

>>211360665
No, it isn't fair use.

>>211360910
No it doesnt

>>211360986
Lol, ok p-zombie

>>211356791 (OP)
>it's afraid
lmao

all of AI is brown coded

>>211357119
I'm no lawyer but this is like suing youtube because there are unlicensed clips of star wars on there.
Ai prompts are user-input. As long as the company can show that they have filters and actively attempt to prevent copyright stuff from being made (and respond to DMCA notices), they should be pretty well covered legally.
You can't sue microsoft because anyone can open up paint and draw Darth Vader in it. This is the exact same situation.

>>211357506
>>one of their final acts will be outlawing emergent technology
The hilarious thing about ai is that it's already too late. Too much is available open-source. Governments around the world could all pass legislation tomorrow that makes LLMs illegal and all it would do is slow down the inevitable singularity. But we're talking about it taking 10 years instead of 2
>just 2 more years!
That's an over-estimation. There's pretty good reason to think we've (one of the tech companies behind closed doors) already hit it.

>>211361115
Its not the same at all youre retarded. They trained the llm on copyrighted images then redistribute the material for profit. Just because theres some bs inbetween and user input to retrieve the image doesnt make it usergen

>>211361197
>singularity
>believing in singularity
>thinking llms could cause it
Ngmi.

>>211361217
>They trained the llm on copyrighted images
You mean like literally every artist ever? In art class, we were literally told to replicate famous art works to hone our skills. This isn't new. The new thing is that a machine is doing it instead of a person.

>>211360390
Your brain reduces images to algorithms.

>>211360390
>An image file can be reduced to an algorithm
thats a retarded take, not for the fact that an image can indeed be replaced by a numeric sequence, but the fact that literally ANYTHING can be. so by your retarded logic, ALL OF IT MUST BE COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, and thus subject to copyright laws

>>211361246
>llms can't cause the singularity because... WELL THEY JUST CAN'T OKAY!
lmao
let me guess, you're still in denial that all human intelligence can be replicated through the process of predictive text?

>>211361217
So you want fanart to be illegal. Disney has tried this a few times.

>>211361257
>>211361262
You are a shit artist the arent you. Its irrelevant because machine arent people and the mechanisms are different as are the legal rights. I dont know why you indians find this so hard to grasp.

>>211361286
NTA but AI fags need to chill with their "qualia don't real" type shit. No one knows how consciousness works, and until we do, we can't say for certain whether current computer hardware can produce it.

>>211361316
Create a completely original image based upon nothing you’ve ever seen right now or you’re not a real artist.

>>211361288
Fanart isnt for profit. Why are you even entering the conversation if you dont understand such basic things
>>211361285
All of the data they train on is someones intellectual property they had no permission to use unless it was commons licensed or whatever but event then it wssnt licensed with the foreknowledge of llm and not for profit clauses generally so i would say almost all training data is poisoning the well, yes
>>211361286
You dont even understand a priori vs posterori

>>211361316
eat shit ranjeesh

>>211361115
>I'm no lawyer but
Then why would anyone want to hear from you on this matter?

>>211361388
Its a blue square with random black dots (i cant post images atm)
>>211361404
Kys jeet

>>211359851
Fuck that school burn it down

>>211361353
We’re not talking about consciousness. We’re talking about memory. Don’t conflate the two.

>>211361423
>I’ve never seen a square before. Or dots. Or the color blue.

You’re a shit artist and a moron.

>>211356791 (OP)
Finally, I’ve been waiting to see a big corporation toss their weight at this shit. Always seemed weird the general AI thing with them training in clearly copyrighted shit was just “just don’t prompt that ;)”

Be interesting to see what the courts do with it, though, considering how pro-AI the current admin is

>>211361353
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
>>211361454
I chose it at random, not based on reference dont blame me bc your esl vocab failed you

but you 'chose' something at 'random' based on preexisting knowledge, there's nothing 'original' about it you fucking moron. gtfo w/e your oh its your 'esl' retarded arguments lmao

>>211361505
Jesus you’re fucking stupid

If you can describe it, it’s based on things you’ve seen before. True originality is not possible. You’re “generating images” the exact same way neuralnets do. You were trained to know what blue, squares, dots, etc were and you reproduce them.

>>211361567
>>211361600
Youre using originality ad absurdum. It doesnt mean to invent your own abstract concepts (esl retards). Humans can abstract, a machine cant bc it cant think

great, now we are throwing around fucking fallacies you'd learn in one of those 101 logic classes lol im out

>>211361671
>originality ad absurdum

It’s being pointed out to you are no more capable of generating an original image than a large language model. It’s you simply drawing from memory. You’re ascribing a magical quality to human art that simply doesn’t exist. Conflating qualia and memory, how you feel about what you’ve “created” and the process by which you created it.

In short, you’re dumber than a fucking brick.

>take 100 copyrighted images
>multiply the top left pixel's color of each of them together
>use this color for the top left pixel in your own image
>repeat until image is complete, serve it to a customer
no copyrighted material is being served. disney's argument is that it's illegal to train a model on copyrighted material, which is anything but cut-and-dry.

>>211361769
Lol, Are you a chinkoid? Real ppl have other processes than memory in the head

>>211357119
what are they even suing for? what damages are they implying? that it somehow makes Disney lose money when someone can slop generate pictures of Draxel whatever his name is with Groot's head because generative AI is janky? or that somehow they "own" output of generative AI if it even resembles a character they own? this is the modern day equivalent of Disney suing nurseries that had Mickey Mouse wallpaper. just desperately shaking a cup around demanding a judge give them a bunch of money for no reason.

>>211361801
>Real ppl have other processes than memory in the head
>>211361769
>[You’re] conflating qualia and memory, how you feel about what you’ve “created” and the process by which you created it.

Copyright is totally pointless now. It doesn't even do what it's supposed to anymore.

>>211361316
>Its irrelevant because machine arent people and the mechanisms are different as are the legal rights.
>as are the legal rights
You're right. A machine can't break the law and infringe on copyright. Only people can do that. Congrats on undermining your own retarded position lmao

>>211361840
Sounds like a yes. Of course you dont understand anything but ethos, it and thus llms are literally your god

>>211361872
>describe a distinction between two different human mental processes
>lmao u onleh hav memry!

>>211361858
Damn youre right i guess disney will have to drop.their lawsuit against instance #213 of chatgpt

>>211361886
No im lmaoing @ you being a chink

>>211361919
>get btfo
>im laughing at u!

I accept your concession.

>>211361353
>No one knows how consciousness works, and until we do, we can't say for certain whether current computer hardware can produce it.
Irrelevant question.
What consciousness is and whether or not it can be replicated is missing the forest for the trees. It's literally impossible to prove that anyone has consciousness aside from yourself. And you can only prove it to yourself because you have an understanding of your thoughts. You can't prove that anyone else isn't just a fleshy robot. And likewise, you can't prove that the computer/phone you're viewing this messageboard on doesn't have a consciousness of its own.
None of that matters.
What does matter is that an algorithm that's essentially just predictive text can replicate human responses so accurately that it can pass the turing test with flying colours. Scientists and religiousfags have been in denial about what that means for years but let me spell it out: humans are no smarter than machines that can be created with electricity
The whole idea that human consciousness is some crazy complicated mystical thing has been completely undermined and all the people that coped that human soul gave off an irreplicable quality to human output/thinking are permanently buttblasted

>>211361963
P zombie

>>211361896
>the american legal system relies on logic and justice
>this is especially true when copyright law is involved
kek oh wow, you sure showed me

>>211361839
The real answer is that these large companies like Disney have been waiting behind the scenes for the technology to develop and now they can use it for themselves. They're literally in on it too, doesn't look good when billion dollar AI companies are fucking everyone over so now these media companies are playing bad cop. The likely outcome is that midjourney gets destroyed but also bought out by Disney.

>>211361943
>llm is ethos
>what could the other processes possibly be...its not like there are only 2 other corollaries

>>211361980
That was a dumbass thought experiment by retards who were still high off opium and convinced that there must be some cosmic thing that made them better than a machine capable of the same output.
>I can't explain it man but like... imagine if there was a person except like... he wasn't a person... he just like lacked a soul man... you know what I mean?

>>211362017
Why do you keep conflating various cognitive concepts? Is it because you have no actual arguments?

>>211362056
What argument do you have other than vaguely saying memory with no understanding of neurology?

>>211360173
even if the databases were scrubbed of any official Disney copyrighted material they're still trained on huge troves of data, fanart, pop culture etc. that are influenced by those things. they don't have a case. there's no actual action the court could to do offer Disney "relief" for the horrible problem of AI slop models being able to make pictures of Marvel and Star Wars characters. there's nothing Midjourney can do to stop someone from genning images that look like Disney owned characters even if they block character names. is Disney materially harmed if i generate an image of a black andromorphic cartoon mouse wearing red pants? no, of course not, and they can't prove that either.

>>211362028
P(hilosophical) zombies are people who do not comprehend and often deny the existence or mechanics of consciousness. Basically soulless people like indians and asians and autists

>>211362109
>trust me, I'm an expert

>>211361963
The point is LLMs reproduce how human memory works, also the visual cortex. It’s just half-retarded artfags throwing consciousness into the equation because they can’t understand anything more complex than scribbling.

Oh yes, Disney being evil as usual.

>>211362109
If they can gen promotional material, cartoons etc etc then disneys market and copyright is hurt. Even if it wasnt for profit, but it is so its 110%

>>211362129
>The point is LLMs reproduce how human memory works
that doesn't give software the same rights as a human, retard

How is this even fair?

Many of us make a living from youtube channels about AI trailers.

Our reimaginins are better tha nmost real trailers and people seem to love them. It's harmless, profitable fun.

>>211362086
Well >>211361769 and >>211361600 and >>211361388 stand completely unopposed, as you have literally no response.

You have less than zero understanding of neuralnets and human cognition but you’re absolutely convinced otherwise.

>>211362112
You keep getting btfo because you’re brining concepts into the conversation that simply aren’t relevant, that no one else is talking about or even referencing, and you’re too stupid to realize it.

>>211358903
So theoretically then, wouldn't the bigger companies jump in with financial aid, better lawyers and prepped "experts"
>>211361993
This was my assumption too. It's less a battle over the legal or ethical questions of AI and moreso "securing" that only they get to use it

>>211362123
not an argument, i accept your concession Samir :)

>>211362154
but it's not, unless they can prove that somehow being able to generate janky AI images impacts the sales of their products with actual facts they have no case whatsoever. you would have to argue that Blender or Photoshop infringe on Disney's copyright because you can load up models or images of Darth Vader and create "promotional material". or that someone can make images of Darth Vader from scratch.

>>211362194
Incorrect, you just dont understand what original means as i said already bc youre esl

>>211362159
Creating a legal precedent that memory as a basic concept is copyright infringement is not something you want to happen, is the point. There is no way for a lawyer to come up with an argument that can’t be applied to human memory. Especially if it’s something as inane and vague like “u kent reduce image 2 algorithm if et kawpyrighted”

>>211362161
PAJEETren....

>>211362349
>Using pajeet as an insult

Indians have the highest IQ in the world
All the biggest companies have indian CEOs
Indian men are the most desirable men by women
India is the most beautiful country with a culture over 6000 years old


C to the O to the P to the E

>>211362338
Original:
>created directly and personally by a particular artist; not a copy or imitation.

This is a closed philosophical debate. “True originality” is not possible and the only reason (you) are claiming otherwise right now is because you don’t like the idea a machine is a better artist than you. You’re ascribing a magical quality to human memory that a machine isn’t allowed to have, because it just can’t okay.

>>211362326
>if you don't mindlessly Midjourney and claim they can do no wrong in the eyes of the law, you....must be Indian!

>>211361848
Typically when you see a copyright lawsuit over something like this it's usually a branding issue.
>Stupid kid downloads Pokemon fan game which has cussing and beer
>Parents of kids who downloaded game go to Nintendo and throw a bitchfit telling them to do something
>Cease and Desist letter sent.
Fan artists and bootleggers slip by because they're all small fish but Disney is worried the mass-produced obese Judy Hopps porn is gonna hurt their brand sooner or later.

>>211362405
>>if you don't mindlessly Midjourney
the ESL cries out in pain as you point out his brown skin

>>211356791 (OP)
These AI companies created this shit and said, "You guys figure out the ethics and rules. We have money to count."

>>211362112
>P(hilosophical) zombies are people who do not comprehend and often deny the existence or mechanics of consciousness
No they aren't you fucking idiot. They're people who lack conscious awareness and are always talked about in regards to lacking "qualia". The thought experiment refers to a theoretical person who lacked a consciousness and operated in an entirely mechanical way like a machine.
I'm guess you're a philosophy drop-out since you don't understand this incredibly basic concept.

>>211356791 (OP)
ChatGPJEET, is this the final curtain?

>>211362404
By that definition anything a human creates is more original than what an llm can

>>211362430
this is just like every other advance in technology, a big company thinks they're special snowflakes and can halt technological advancement and proceeds to get the shit slapped out of them. the film industry pitched a fit over televisions, carriage companies pitched a fit over cars, etc. there's no universe where a judge says "okay sweetheart we're going to rule that every AI company ever has to make sure that it is COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE to ever generate anything that can even be perceived as being related to a Disney owned IP".

>>211362129
>The point is LLMs reproduce how human memory works,
Human intelligence in general. There's a fair argument that all intelligence is linked to memory but it's not important.
What's important is that human "intelligence" has been accurately reconstructed through the same method of predictive text (which has hilarious implications for what we consider to be intelligence in the first place)

>>211362470
Only if you have worse than zero understanding of how neuralnets generate images.

>>211362161
You got paid for doing that?

>>211362455
Well its pretty hard to not comprehend consciousness unless you lack it anon

>>211362326
Jeets are PRO ai you dumbass

>>211362505
Everything an llm makes is an impersonal indirect imitation

>>211362543
apparently not seeing as all the ESL brown posters in this thread are cheering Disney on in making the concept of imagination a form of copyright infringement.

My biggest problem with AI(and it's not even really the AI) is the pervading idea that art is an innate ability and not a learned skill. You see so many people saying it's about making art for everyone and artists are obsolete like they're an elite club or a guild, but they just practiced. People start it, give up, and quit. There's nothing more to it than programming, mechanics, medicine, etc. etc. I wish people picked up more creative outlets as hobbies, and the idea that art in any form beyond doodling was never attainable for everyone served to filter so many as never gonna make its. I hope AI will eventually be less of "x but doing y" textual prompts that need references to be accurate and more of allowing people to explore their creativity

>>211362441
More like
>computer scientists accidentally made a breakthrough with machine learning
>no one gave a fuck except internet nerds
>advancements were made underneath everyone's noses
>the advancements were exponential
>eventually youtubers started talking about it as the tech started creating impressive results and people called it "ai"
>tech companies saw a goldmine since the general public were enamoured by the idea of actual ai
>they rushed in (too late in my opinion) to sell the tech to everyone they could thinking it was a bubble
>the bubble never burst
>governments are comprised of old retards who don't understand phones, nevermind cutting edge machine learning
>laws are physically unable to keep up
>tech companies are making money hand over foot so don't give a shit about anything
>a minority of people have realised that we've accidentally unironically started the singularity countdown
>the open-source nature, along with it being incredibly lucrative means that the box can't be closed
>we have a 50-50 shot of either cybernet or a benevolent machine dictator taking over the planet within the next 20 years
What a time to be alive!

>>211362557
You weren’t born knowing what the color blue was. You were trained through sensory exposure. You can only reproduce what you were trained on.

>>211362578
Jeetsocrates defines man as a nonmetal computer

>>211362347
>There is no way for a lawyer to come up with an argument that can’t be applied to human memory.
Irrelevant because human memory isn't on trial here (if I made a movie with a character that looks almost exactly like Darth Vader from memory and started selling it, they also would have the right to sue). The use of copyrighted material to make software that competes directly with the producers of the copyrighted material is the core issue.
>>211362475
straw man, see above

>>211362626
The brain is literally (LITERALLY!) just a fleshy computer

>>211356791 (OP)
The same companies that steal your data complain about people using characters of their movies

>>211362659
humans have rights, computers do not

>>211362659
Computers dont have qualia. Llms cant even perform logic or math

>>211362543
So does the Chinese. That explains why there are so many AI anime artworks on the internet.

>>211362644
There's no way you're actually this stupid. You're arguing in bad faith.
The same legal principal could be used to say that TotallyOriginalCharacterMcGee infringes on copyright because it was inspired by Dath Vader. The proof? Well TotallyOriginalCharacterMcGee has a metal arm and we have social media posts from when the creator was 15 and drew some fanart of Darth Vader one time.

>>211362609
AI told me its prediction for the arrival of the singularity was 2045

>>211362678
>we don't give machines rights therefore they're different
Wow. Great argument. So if a law was passed that took away rights from Chuds then you'd no longer count as human? Interesting

>>211362644
>that competes directly with the producers of the copyrighted material is the core issue
congratulations, you've lost your case. there is no impact on Disney products or merchandise by generating janky slop AI images on Midjourney. have a nice day, good luck next lawsuit!

>>211362695
>Computers dont have qualia.
Impossible to prove. To even attempt would out you as a blistering retard.
>Llms cant even perform logic or math
Very easy to prove that they can do both of these things
>b-but sometimes they make mistakes!
Like humans?

>>211362703
looks like Blender and Photoshop are going to be outlawed next guys, you can use them to make pictures of Darth Vader which Disney can totally prove in court cuts into their bottom line.

>>211359871
Yes, it is. All your phone camera is is a machine that "looks" at a movie and "remembers" it. It just does it really, really well because it's a machine. HEY, just like "AI". Would you look at that. Why, I wonder if that means that all of these AI companies could be responsible for shocking amounts of clear copyright violations. But, you know, they should be fine as long as they didn't use those capabilities for monetary gain. That's free use, right? Except, every single AI company did exactly that to pump their stock.

But don't you worry. As long as Midjourney can show that most users aren't using the software to violate copyright then-oh wait! That's almost exclusively what it's used for, isn't it?

Midjourney is going to lose. It's going to set precedent. When it does, those big media companies will be the only ones allow to train their in house AI on their movies and then have the AI regurgitate more shit. Welcome to capitalism, sars.

>>211362610
Yeah.but whats your point? When my brain trained blue it created an abstract concept with a gradient. When i want to color something blue i reference the abstract not a memory.
When an llm gets blue input it references other copies labelled blue and chooses the most relevant based on other parameters in other words it shits out a memory rotely

>>211362757
>Impossible to prove. To even attempt would out you as a blistering retard.I
Lol
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
>>211362757
>Very easy to prove that they can do both of these things
They rly cant senpai

>>211357105
The proper comparison would be a camera, which has been ruled to violate copyright. Nice try.

>>211362695
>Computers dont have qualia.
Neither do mice. They still have brains. Fucking idiot.

>>211362695
Qualia isn’t memory, qualia is how you feel about memories.

>>211359871
Yes it is actually

>>211362806
>that's right your honor we're suing Sony because they sell cameras that can be used to take pictures of our copyrighted characters, they're clearly profiting off of our IP!
genuinely braindead retarded

>>211362804
>this thought experiment I don't understand proves me right
Are you just trolling at this point?
>They rly cant senpai
Oh. I retract my previous question

>>211362810
Mice do have qualia
>>211362814
I dont think that is requiste

>>211362842
Im sorry you dont understand it. Ill explain it when i get to my desktop if the threads still up

>>211362841
>>211362806
>It's now illegal to take photos and sony is to pay out 115 trillion dollars to compensate the victims of a "generational-long" copyright infringement case

>>211359871
It is if you monetize it commercially.

>>211362761
They’ve already tried to outlaw such programs bro. They’ve taken literally every means of democratization of media to court.

>>211362844
>Mice do have qualia
Prove it

This isn’t a philosophical argument, it’s a legal one. There is room for AI generated art, but not one that was trained with ripped off pictures without the artist or companies permission.

>>211362841
Yeeeeaaaahhhhhh, calling an argument retarded doesn't make it so. It's going to stick. It's too obvious that AI is a copyright violation machine. There are too many examples. When it gets before a jury, it's over. And you know all those 80 yearold's who think AI is magic? Judges in the USA are old as fuck boomers. They're going to take one look at clear cut examples of copyrighted characters recreated and give Disney a LOT of leeway. You're mad because you know I'm right. Get fucked, sar.

>>211362780
The point is neuralnet model training is identical to your first x years of life. You aren’t born sentient, you aren’t born experiencing qualia, you aren’t born knowing what a square is, etc.

>>211362844
>Mice do have qualia
-have worse reasoning skills than LLMs
-can't do math
-can't solve logic problems
-can't read
-can make coherent arguments
Yeah that's no a bud. By your own rules they clearly don't.

>>211362842
Artfags/anti-aifags really are that dumb bro.

>>211361115
>this is like suing youtube because there are unlicensed clips of star wars on there.

This was a huge issue in early youtube, though?

>>211362908
I did by saying it, existentialism. Checkmate

>>211362919
That means artists aren’t allowed to ever view copyrighted material.

>>211362922
>Yeeeeaaaahhhhhh

>>211362600
>Tfw have essential tremors in both hands and genuinely do have a barrier to entry on making art.
For what it's worth, yes, it felt pretty liberating when prompting shit but I wouldn't call myself an "artist" by any stretch of the imagination.
It's like a kid doing well in the Special Olympics, right? The idea supposedly that the kid gets to partake in sports for a change but calling them a real "athlete" is stupid. Not because of their disability but because a core part of the whole event is that the participants don't have to do that whole "training and earning their way in" part.
Same with AI

>>211362945
How does one have less than 0 reasoning?

>>211362973
What?

>>211362925
Do they forget?

>>211362841
>>211362875
I know they don't it in India, but in America when they catch you inputing copyrighted data into you Sony camera, IE pirating a movie, they arrest you. Jesus titty fucking christ you jeets are dumb. It's unbelievably clear cut logic. AND it's going to hold up in court.

>>211362967
kind of but fair use won out, there was no way to actually prove damages from having 1-2 minute clips of Star Wars up on youtube. it's the same with AI. Disney can't actually prove material damages to their brand or bottom line because someone can gen a picture of Darth Vader. if someone were utilizing this stuff and selling materials with these characters they'd have a case, but Midjourney isn't doing that, they'd only have a case against the user selling the material made using Midjourney. it's like arguing companies that sell pencils are responsible for people making fan art of Darth Vader.

>>211362967
And it was resolved with the courts ruling that user-uploaded-content didn't hold the platform accountable unless the platform was made aware that the content was infringing copyright and didn't act. This is why the DMCA is a thing and why issuing a notice to a site will pretty much immediately result in a takedown without a trial of any sort

>>211362703
>The same legal principal could be used to say that TotallyOriginalCharacterMcGee infringes on copyright because it was inspired by Dath Vader. The proof? Well TotallyOriginalCharacterMcGee has a metal arm and we have social media posts from when the creator was 15 and drew some fanart of Darth Vader one time.
I didn't say suing would guarantee a win for them. Allowances are made for fair use and parody in copyright law. That's what courts hash out.
>>211362761
If I made fanart of Darth Vader in Photoshop and started selling it, Disney already has the right to shut that down. Fanart is rarely gone after because it's simply not worth it for them.

Look up copyright law and get some basic education on the issue, because you are looking really, really stupid right now.
https://www.theverge.com/24062159/ai-copyright-fair-use-lawsuits-new-york-times-openai-chatgpt-decoder-podcast

>>211356791 (OP)
>>211357119
Trump's latest bill includes a bit that says AI can't be regulated for the next 10 years.
They might be able to hide behind that.

>>211363003
Neuralnet model training is identical to how humans learn to make art.

>>211362970
>yes, the anti-ai retards are genuinely this stupid

>>211357101
kek I was going to give you a gentle correction.

>>211363054
humans have rights, neuralnet models do not

>>211363017
No and you don’t really forget either.

>>211362953
For the record I'm an artfag. But any actual artist should love the potential ai gives. Imagine having thousands of ideas that you're unable to realise due to time/financial/resource constraints. And then imagine that something comes along that solves all of that.
It's like the invention of the camera on steroids

>>211363025
yes Samir, an individual committing copyright infringement is held legally responsible, Disney doesn't then take the camera manufacturer to court and gets a big payout because that's not how the law works in white countries. not sure how it works in whatever brown third world hovel you come from, i guess the CEO of the company would get his hands cut off or something?

>>211360390
>(illegally)
Putting the cart before the horse here a bit

>>211356791 (OP)
saar I am needing to generate the darth vader saar for my youtube previewing channel

>>211363054
>this digital computer is identical to your neurotransmitter soup of a brain

>>211363046
but again Disney can't go after Photoshop because a user of Photoshop was selling fanart. that's not how the law functions at all which makes you smugly linking some article you haven't even read even funnier.

>>211363074
So its identical but it lacks a core functionality? Are you suffering from leaky brain disease?

>>211363058
What qualia producing structure does it lack that humans have

>>211363078
i've seen real artists do some cool stuff with AI. drawing out line work for a character and background, having it filled in with AI and tweaking it themselves or just finishing the drawing based on the ideas the AI gave them. it's really neat stuff. apparently back in the day when Photoshop and the like first started coming out there was a lot of sneering over it like with AI how "drawing with a computer isn't REAL art!"

certainly there's a different flavor to it given it's generative, some guy prompting a picture is never going to be impressive, but i'm really curious to see what actual artists are able to do with this technology as it grows.

>>211363122
Photoshop isn't an AI model, no pictures of Darth Vader were involved in making the software (presumably so you could use Photoshop to automate making more images of Darth Vader) hence a poorly made strawman on your part. You're just really, really stupid. Listen to the podcast on the page I linked. You don't even have the basic vocabulary to make any arguments so you just strawman.

>>211363081
Here's the deal, IF these AI companies don't NEED the copyrighted material for their software to work, then they have nothing to worry about. Right? That's how that works. IF they don't need to violate copyright to build these AI then the lawsuits won't touch them. They just have to demonstrate that they didn't use any copyrighted material. Just like cameras and pencils don't need petabytes of copyrighted images to work.

BUT if those AI do actually NEED copyrighted material to function and IF those AI generate revenue, then the companies are fucked. It's that simple. The game they're about to lose was always about never getting sued in the first place because a loss in court is inevitable. The only way to win is to Facebook/youtube shit and head off lawsuits before they start. They didn't and now they're fucked.

>>211363054
That’s for the courts to decide.

>>211363125
Consciousness isn’t a core functionality of human brains, it’s an emergent quality.

niggas talking about qualia

>>211363194
Who is talking about consciousness??? Stick a cork in your ears quick!!!

Jeets be like qualia isnt real my ai gf loves me just the same as a real one

>>211356791 (OP)
Disney has woefully and vengefully abused every copyright they own; It's hard to be sympathetic.

>>211363252
Yeah but llms are stealing your posts/art/code and then taking your job and making money to boot. So who is the real villain

>>211363179
it doesn't matter what your podcast says, even if the models removed all of the "copyrighted" material people can still generate images of Darth Vader or Vaderlike characters. there's still tons of data in these models that is pop culture centric and based around Star Wars characters and concepts. Disney doesn't own all the data on the internet related to their IPs, it's a nonsensical argument and goes back to trying to regulate imagination as copyright fraud. not happening, sorry. now say "strawman" a bunch because you don't have an argument.

>>211363182
then you've lost your case because the technology doesn't rely on "copyrighted material". it can utilize it, but i could generate images of Mickey Mouse or Darth Vaderlike characters very easily with some mystical model that was somehow scrubbed of any trace of any kind of information about any IP that Disney has ever owned. but the problem Disney has in this case is that they own so many things now that are ubiquitous to pop culture and society that they can't actually copyright that. if i write a TV script and it references Thor they don't own that, they don't get a piece of my script or get to sue the laptop manufacturer i made the script on. that's not how these laws work or have ever worked.

>>211363284
>can still generate images of Darth Vader or Vaderlike characters.
Because its stealing intellectual property that isnt copywritten of the copyright in question to produce the copyright ip /for profit/

>>211363284
>but i could generate images of Mickey Mouse or Darth Vaderlike characters very easily with some mystical model that was somehow scrubbed of any trace of any kind of information about any IP that Disney has ever owned.
more strawman, an AI model made using only licensed or public domain data and causing issues for copyright holders doesnt exist lol
all you do is strawman

>>211363338
can you stop shoveling curry in your mouth and actually read what you're replying to

>>211363433
>waah waah waah strawman strawman i don't have an argument
i accept your concession :)

>>211363184
No, it is not.

>>211363225
anti-ai tards always bring up consciousness and then deny bringing up consciousness. Like you are now

>i accept your concession :)

>>211363246
No one talking about the similarities between neuralnets and human memory is talking about qualia.

>>211363575
Pretty sure i am talking about forgetting and you being a retard who doesnt known what identical means

>>211363602
It could be identical and it wouldnt change anything

You know, this whole thing is giving me flashbacks to the late 2000s and early 2010s.
Back then, people were actually under the impression that crediting the creator/rights holder, or just saying the word "parody!" or "fair use!" would somehow protect whatever they were doing from the guys who practiced trademark and copyright law for a living
representing massive corporations who hired them for top dollar.
Or when the knowledge around facebook actually used data came out and people went around basically "By posting this, I am saying that I don't actually agree to the contract I signed" instead of just deleting their fucking accounts and petitioning the government for online privacy laws.

>>211363630
At some point that stupid argument turns on its head, because if AI becomes sentient, forcing it to do anything it doesn't want to do is slavery.
>>211363727
Retards are forced to invent imaginary AI models (that don't exist) that don't use stolen data to try to make some irrelevant point. Literal mental gymnastics.

The issue they are raising isn't that they used copyrighted data to train the models but the models can recreate copyrighted characters which is the dumbest argument they can make.
(But if they win it can be retroactively applied to other mediums which will give them more power which is what they want.)

>>211356791 (OP)
those of us who do actual piracy will have the spotlight taken off us for a while. nice

>>211363837
you're still seething because you're dumb and wrong lol ahhahahaha

Fun to see jeets freaking out at the prospect of their shitty programs getting axed.

I'm now realizing none of you people actually read the fucking article

They are literally suing over the fact that the AI can generate pictures of the characters and profits off of it.
There are multiple lawsuits going on based on the possible copyrighted material within the AIs own database.
>According to the lawsuit, only Disney and Universal are allowed to commercialize these characters and build a business around them. However, Midjourney has allegedly allowed its subscribers to generate images of characters like Darth Vader in violation of copyright laws
https://www.entrepreneur.com/business-news/disney-universal-sue-ai-startup-midjourney-plagiarism/493100
The lawsuit isn't over data scraping, it's the same reason Disney sued the fucking daycares back in the day.

Did any of you stupid motherfuckers actually think the Mouse was gonna cripple the material it fully intends on using?
There is nothing related to the use of data scraping and collection. It is neither a win or loss for pro or anti AI factions.

It's the same kind of copyright lawsuit that these companies use all the fucking time.

>>211364134
So you are saying the nation of India can sigh in relief?

>>211364134
>i can't believe you didn't read an article that wasn't linked in the op!
retard

>>211363821
>At some point that stupid argument turns on its head, because if AI becomes sentient, forcing it to do anything it doesn't want to do is slavery.
chinese room but also LLMs are not AI and can't be even hypothetically sentient. Consider the jeet and chink saying memory is identical (lol) to LLM training.

Let's say for arguments sake it is and just cut out a chunk of human (or animal) brain and use it in place of the LLM. Can it be sentient? Of course not it's just a chunk of memory all it can do is output some rote data.

>>211364134
They're offering the GPUs to generate whatever you want, and that includes generating pictures of Darth Vader using fan LORAs. This is like going after the paint class because they are allowing their students to paint Micky Mouse or some shit.

>>211364237
Okay so regardless of your thoughts on AI what it means is that Disney is the bad guy here because basically this is a "we want to have our cake and eat it too" situation.
If they win then this is what's gonna happen
>AI can still scrape literally everything people make for its internal database
>But now if you try to prompt in a popular character from a massive corporation the AI is gonna say "I'm sorry but that character is copyrighted so I can't do that"
ChatGPT already has this feature because OpenAI are well aware that there's a gun pointed at their backs ready to fire, that's why Disney is going for this instead of OpenAI.

>>211363837
You’re absolutely correct and perfectly calm.

>>211356791 (OP)
>Jews sue jews to make jews control AI even more
>Midjourney, Inc. was founded in San Francisco, California, by David Holz
We need to protect AI art!

>>211364472
That’s not likely. What’s more likely is that if these tools are used at all, they will be trained with a legitimate body of data that Disney (or the company building the model) legitimately procures. It’s not going to go both ways.

>>211358903
And they won’t have success with that strat, because governments will bail out and protect OpenAI and other national security players like a dragon hoards a pile of gold,

>>211364018
Did you reply to the wrong person?

>>211364748
This depends entirely on the outcome of other lawsuits and legal doctrine regarding AI databases.
What you've talked about is what they're currently doing but there's a catch. They're doing that now because they're still waiting on whether not it's okay to go further

>>211365188
I replied to myself. My therapist told me I need to better myself using the smeagol method

>>211359801
My brain is a database
I just took thought 15 dirty things about your mom and the lead lawyer's mom too. Stashed away for later review.

>>211358695
you need proof they used the copyrighted work
"artistic inspiration" fan works and parody are all fine and covered under fair use
commercial distribution or profit using someone elses copyrighted material isnt

>>211356855
Wizard of Oz has been public domain longer than you’ve been alive.

>>211357119
>Why wouldn't they win?
Because, unlike they state, no copyrighted image is being stored. It's gonna be an interesting case and whichever way it turns out, it will be unfair.
The real way to get Midjourney is to make them show the training material. Looking at an image isn't illegal, but downloading it (Midjourney guaranteed had a folder with a million images) to feed it into a computer service others can pay for is.

>>211361115
>I'm no lawyer but this is like suing youtube because there are unlicensed clips of star wars on there.
Youtube got sued. You can put Star Wars stuff on there, because they have a special arrangement.

>>211361839
>what are they even suing for? what damages are they implying? that it somehow makes Disney lose money when someone can slop generate pictures of Draxel whatever his name is with Groot's head because generative AI is janky?

BIGGER QUESTION... CAN DISNEY "AFFORD" TO LOSE A LAWSUIT?

Financial Update. These streaming services are dying and are heavily in debt. Great thing that their DEI AGENDA is to piss everyone off repeatedly and then insult, demean, and namecall potential customers.

HOMOMAX
Warner Bros. Discovery, the parent company of HBO Max, reported total debt of about $38 billion as of March 2025. With the company's upcoming split into two entities—Global Networks ($4 Billion) and Streaming & Studios ($34 billion)(which includes HBO Max)—the majority of this debt will be allocated to Global Networks, but a "not-insignificant portion" will remain with Streaming & Studios.
===
PARAMORONS
Paramount Global had approximately $15.52 billion in total debt as of March 2025. Their long-term debt for the same period was about $14.16 billion.
===
DEGENERACY+
As of March 2025, Disney's total debt is approximately $42.88 billion. Their long-term debt for the same period is about $36.44 billion.
===
NIGFLIX
Netflix had total debt of approximately $15.01 billion as of March 2025. Some sources report a slightly higher figure of $17.42 billion, but the most consistently cited number is around $15 billion.
===
AHOLETV
Apple's total debt as of March 2025 is approximately $98.18 billion. Of this, long-term debt accounts for about $78.57 billion.

>>211365694
Only plebs get penalized for debts.

>>211356903
They're probably going to use OpenAI themselves. They want to benefit from AI. They don't want the public to.

Amusingly, this will still hurt pajeets as special effects rendered by AI is even cheaper than jeet CG. More scammers for the elderly, I guess.

>>211357119
>that midjourney output
lol parody is except from copyright. They will have to change the law. Which Disney has been able to get legislators to do in the past but they never really went against big corps

>>211359801
using them to jack off to, sure

>>211363033
>kind of but fair use won out, there was no way to actually prove damages from having 1-2 minute clips of Star Wars up on youtube. it's the same with AI. Disney can't actually prove material damages to their brand or bottom line because someone can gen a picture of Darth Vader.

TECHNICALLY, IT CREATES A PUZZLE PIECE ARGUMENT.

Imagine you've got a puzzle with 180 pieces.
Each piece equals 2 minutes of video.

If you get 90 puzzle pieces posted online, that can be the whole movie. If each chunk is 2.5 minutes, that's enough pieces to seamlessly rejoin the puzzle with no gaps. Technically, most folks will post the primary interest parts of the movie leaving huge gaps with no clean overlap. But it becomes essentially an indirect TORRENT of the full video.

INDIVIDUALLY it's legal Fair Use. Practically, the whole movie gets posted. Let's say you create a 3D model of Darth Vader, but it's illegal for copyright reasons. So divide the task into 32 chunks. One does the left hand, another the right hand, one does the codpiece, another does a boot, another does the back of the helmet, and so on...

The tricky legal aspect is the PRACTICAL ASPECT of fair use given the attacks on AI. You've got a STAR WARS movie sales pitch, you've got the script done, got a screenplay roughed out, you've got the storyboards ready for the sales pitch... THE STORYBOARD USES COPYRIGHTED IP DESIGNS. THE SCREENPLAY USES TRADEMARKED NAMES. You're ILLEGALLY selling a story to the STAR WARS rights holders (DEGENERACY+) using copyrighted designs and infringing uses of character names, legally DISNEY can sue you for trying to sell them a story using character designs they already legally own, you're trying to make a profit using designs you don't legally own to a bunch of DISNEY assholes with lawyers.

SEE THE PROBLEM?
That's basically where we are with AI. The rights holders are so bristling with self-destructive idiocy, you cannot use the designs to sales pitch any profitable new ideas.

>>211359851
>little timmy says he doesnt have a disney account
>his dad just prates and uses an hdmi cable
>all the kids laugh at him

>>211363033
>kind of but fair use won out
No. Almost none of that on Youtube is "fair use". Fair use is very specific. Like when you criticize a piece of music you may play the exactly part you're referring to. But you may not play it in the background or show the cover art.
There's a long video of that one guy who explains it all. Bascially all Youtubers would be dead if Youtube didn't have specials deals with the copyright holders.

The next legal argument is a much simpler argument.

EXCLUSIVE DEALERSHIP AND CREATIVE COLLAPSE.

My previous example of DISNEY suing a dude making a movie pitch using designs which necessarily infringe upon Disney copyrights means Disney cal LEGALLY seize all that effort without compensation under Copyright Infringement declarations. So who's going to pitch a screenplay to them afterwards? Nobody.

However, since FANS and OBSESSIVES tend to fixate on movie characters like piano players fixate on sheet music, the question remains, if you aggressively limit the junkie addict from getting their fix from any other dealers, who's going to supply new product when the current drug cooks age out?

STAR WARS COMICBOOKS have existed for decades. Now imagine Disney aggressively sued fan artists that mastered drawing Darth Vader, Emperor Palestine, the droids and so on... forcing them to choose less aggressively lawsuit-obsessed fandoms. Now you have an artist THAT COULD PROFITABLY DRAW YOUR IP PRODUCT, but since they were burned by the lawsuits, will refuse to draw your product ever again. Congrats, Disney, you just fucked over the replacement generation of artists that could be making you cash by being lawsuit obsessed.

AI ART, if treated in a similar manner, will also be forbidden from accurately or accidentally generating "Disney Brand Images". So who wins? The companies that aren't as litigious, they get AI ART systems that can generate entire movies with Woody Woodpecker or Popeye or the Schmoo. If Disney wins this lawsuit, you could even have 3D modeling software forbidding to use "Copyrighted Shapes" so now Disney has to roll their own 3D modeling engines with Dongle keys indicating they are the sole rights holders because all other engines will refuse outright to make "Forbidden Disney Copyright Shapes".

>>211366868
The winner are platforms that already own a shit ton of training meterial. Adobe for example, or those stock photo services. Maybe even Youtube or Facebook.
Basically having a big folder full of images you have the legal right to train with, without any doubt.
All current models would die. Who knows who goes after OpenAI. They clearly downloaded every piece of text they could find with a script, not giving a shit about copyright.

>>211363284
>then you've lost your case because the technology doesn't rely on "copyrighted material".
You don't know how they made this generation of AI do you? It works because they trained it on as much media as they could. That's how thy did it. They didn't sit down and write a bunch of code in a basement that just "knows" how to make sense of images and sound. They fed their algorithms a shitload of media so that it could understand media. THAT'S the black box. When you train it again, locally or otherwise, that's having it select for specific outcomes, but the code for the AI itself was "built" by feeding it mountains and mountains of copyrighted material. Without that material how would you possibly build these psuedo-AI at all? No, really. That's a question. How do YOU think it works?

>>211366868
All that means is that hypothetically, Disney could sue for control of AI companies. Which would be just as bad or worse than the techbro morons.

>>211364830
You’re skipping the part where the corps own the government

Abstract Summary of "Copy Protection" by Paolo Bacigalupi**

In a dystopian future governed by draconian intellectual property laws, an AI-driven enforcement system ruthlessly erases all copyrighted material—not just from digital archives, but from human memory itself. As books, films, and music vanish without a trace, society grapples with the eerie gaps in cultural knowledge, leaving individuals unable to recall the art that once shaped their lives. The story follows a protagonist who rediscovers fragments of "illegal" content and must decide whether to preserve them at great personal risk or submit to the system’s totalitarian control.

===

The solution is akin to how they prevent photocopiers from making duplicates of money. Essentially when it recognizes the ORION PATTERN the copier can refuse to make a copy or purposely screw up the copy or shut down requiring maintenance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EURion_constellation

So Disney copyrighted material could have a DATAGLYPH dithering pattern working like a DON'T REMEMBER ME scream at cameras, copiers, AI image recorders.

https://www.microglyphs.com/english/html/dataglyphs.shtml

https://www.microglyphs.com/english/html/dgtech.shtml

If you only saw a small chunk of a Mickey Mouse Ear, the dataglyphs on it would say COPY AMNESIA. Practically speaking though, DISNEY NEEDS CUSTOMERS TO MAKE IMAGES. At Disneyland you'd take pictures of your smiling kids with a performer in a Mickey Mouse costume. With COPYRIGHT AMNESIA glyphs, the result could be Mickey Mouse is a grey outline or a blurred blob or the picture refuses to be saved or the camera device locks you out of using it and reports you to the police. Even a tiny chunk of Mickey Mouse's eye or glove or foot might trigger this result. Result, no pictures to share, no sales pitch for other folks to visit the park, not that any pictures would be worth anything. You could do this with QR CODE "No Photos" tags, but Dataglyph designs are invisible.

>>211356791 (OP)
Based.
AI is already artistically bankrupt. Now they only need to be actually bankrupt

>>211368013
Courtroom artists but everywhere.

>>211356791 (OP)
fair use Mickey. This is like suing Bic because their pens in the wrong hands can create a Darth Vader drawing. Whens the next remake flop comin out? Need to know when to short your stock

>>211368013
Thanks grok

>>211366868
fan art is made from an actual person. whether it uses someones character or not, the act of the other person making new piece of artwork is transformative, the original rights holder is only entitled to commercial gains unless the work is further transformative and cannot be confused with being apart of the original rightsholders works IE parody/porn etc

AI art is a commercial product of software that directly takes other peoples work and uses their protected works

>>211359871
disney has gone to court multiple times to try to claim that it is

>>211368463
this is, at best, a semantic argument, that, at absolute best, draws a barely existent distinction between how human memory works and how neuralnets work and the ultimate result is that memory is copyright infringement. which is some shit disney has been trying to force into law for a century.

>>211368463
>>211370220
>its semantics to draw disctinction between how human memory works and how neuralnets work
hey they wanted to market it as ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE to make the most money from investments even though its not, so if it has ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE then it has ARTIFICIAL MEMORY, by their own definition its 'totally emulating a human guise'

>>211356791 (OP)
God i hope this lawsuit will be the catalyst forcrashing big tech ai companies and Njudea for created vibe-coded mess and inflated gpu prices.

>>211361115
>I'm no lawyer but
kek, then fuck off.

>>211356791 (OP)
>Companies present lawsuit for public ai models
>Companies create private ai models for their characters
>Sell ai slop
>Now people will not be able to create ai slop with said characters
There is their plan

>>211356791 (OP)
Anything that hinders the growth of LLMs is a good thing. I only recently realized how dangerous they can become, and I probably only thought of like 10 out of a hundred ways it could go bad.

If this makes it illegal to train LLMs on copywrite material, that would be a god send for humanity. Copywrite actually good for humanity? Never would have guessed.

>>211370989
>copywrite
Whoops, should have had Grok proofread.

>>211370220
>>211370640
using another person's image files is not "semantics" its clearly using other peoples work
image collages using other peoples work are under the same copyright restriction, AI is no different

>>211370220
When training your AI, by your own argument, you are more than welcome to hand draw everything you feed it. Everything else is a violation of copyright. Do you get it yet, sar?

>>211370862
No shit. If everyone can make perfect bespoke media in their basement over an afternoon, it literally kills Hollywood. They're desperate to get around paying artists, but they don't want to share. They want to eat their cake and have it. That's why all copyright needs to fucking die.

>>211356830
civitai already deleted all celebs loras

>>211365561
The book is, not the original movie.