• Neato
    link
    fedilink
    211 months ago

    It’s not over and done with. Pass regulation saying every AI accessible w/in the country has to have a publicly available dataset. That way people can see if their works have been stolen or not. When we inevitably see works recreated wholesale without proper copyright, the AI creators can be sued or fined.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      411 months ago

      Couple of things here - what do you do with the open source models already published? There’s terabytes of data encapsulated in those. Some have published corpora, some don’t. How do you plan to determine that a work comes from an unregistered AI?

      Also, with respect to “within the country” - VPNs exist. TOR exists. SD cards exist. What’s your plan to control the flow of trained models without violating civil rights?

      This is a teflon slope covered in oil. (IMO)

      • Neato
        link
        fedilink
        411 months ago

        If they don’t publish what their training data is, they should be considered violating copyright. The world governments can block sites if they want. It’s hard to swat down all of the random wikis and such but major AI competitors wouldn’t be a big problem.

        • FaceDeer
          link
          fedilink
          111 months ago

          “Innocent until proven guilty” is a rather important foundation for most justice systems. You’re proposing the exact opposite.

    • FaceDeer
      link
      fedilink
      211 months ago

      That way people can see if their works have been stolen or not.

      Firstly, nothing at all is being “stolen.” The words you’re looking for are “copyright violation.”

      Secondly, it does not currently appear that training an AI model on published material is a copyright violation. You’re going to have to point to some actual law indicating that. Currently that sort of thing is generally covered by fair use.