*Microslop please fix headline
I’m still seeing pro-AI quotes from Tim Sweeney though
The theft will continue regardless of what the courts say. We’re just following your example, Microsoft.
Microslop and Epic are acting like characters out of Fawlty Towers.
Just not as endearing.
Now it’s theft when you lose money. Cool
Our justice system has gone full mask off, it exist to protect capital. There needs to be serious reform to protect the people with consequences for corporatists.
The legal system has determined money is speech, which means their voices are a hell of a lot louder than yours.
Capital lobbyists already have so much sway over the government in the US, I think we should go full corporatist and build national level unions to counter their interests.
So, that means YOU will delete everything YOU scraped for LLM training and start over by ASKING and PAYING first?
Lol. Lmao.
What do you mean I cant eat my cake?!
Well you can eat it, but then you won’t have it anymore.
That’s not what has happened. Microsoft and Epic don’t want their IP used without they have been paid. They do not agree that training on Ai is theft, they agree on using their IP publicly without their consent is theft.
I’m not using their IP publically. I’m training my AI to make fortnight for the browser
I am not talking about training the Ai, I am talking about assets. If you use Fortnite IP, then you are infringing and stealing their IP. Like Halo on the browser, where you didn’t have to provide the assets from the rom yourself.
But that would mean them scrapping all of my code from GitHub to train their AI would be stealing my IP! That can’t be true, right? Their not thieves, right?
Besides that’s not Master Chief TM that’s AI generated Master Chief. Which is … Obviously … Different, and not just IP laundring
Besides that’s not Master Chief TM that’s AI generated Master Chief. Which is … Obviously … Different, and not just IP laundring
Doesn’t matter. You can have IP infringement, without using the exact same likeness. It needs to be samy enough, to count as an infringement / theft.
But that would mean them scrapping all of my code from GitHub to train their AI would be stealing my IP! That can’t be true, right? Their not thieves, right?
I’m not talking about training the Ai.
Correction: They think distributing their IP without permission is a violation of their copyrights (which is true).
“Theft” is not a thing when it comes to copyright. Every time someone uses “theft” to describe copyright infringement, the MPAA, RIAA, Microsoft, EPIC, Sony, and Disney all have a little orgasm and layoff another worker that created that IP.
That’s splitting the hairs. If someone uses an IP without permission, then it is theft.
Listen: Theft is a legal term, just like copyright. When someone steals something (theft), the owner of that thing doesn’t have it anymore. When someone violates copyright the owner still has the thing and can continue to make as many copies of it as they like.
In the 80s, 90s, and 2000s the RIAA and MPAA had vast marketing campaigns trying to re-brand copyright violation as “theft”. Copyright existed for centuries before Congress decided to pass The Sound Recording Act of 1971 and the Copyright Act of 1976 which was the first time (ever) that copying something without permission could be prosecuted as a criminal offense (instead of civil).
The “Piracy is Theft” thing is literally from one of their advertising campaigns! They invented it and it’s nothing but pro-corporate propaganda. Do not think for one second that anyone stands to lose significant amounts of money from piracy other than corporations and even that’s debatable.
Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem. -Gabe Newell, founder of Valve Software (Steam)
Individuals have been copying stuff since forever and nobody cared until some bean counter invented the disproven concept of “one pirated thing == one lost sale.” We all know that’s not how it works! That entire concept is another form of “Hollywood Accounting”:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
So no. Fuck no. It’s not “splitting hairs.”
If you steal an art and use it in ways you have no rights to, then it is theft.
Yeah, if I physically stole the artwork, then yes? That’s stealing. Let’s cover all the bases, though, shall we?
If I took a picture of some art, is that stealing? No. That’s not illegal anywhere.
If I then shared that picture with a friend? No. That doesn’t count as a “public performance” or “public display” of the work.
If I then shared that picture with the Internet at large? Yes, that’s copyright infringement—every time someone downloaded it, that counts as one violation. Specifically, derivative copyright infringement (which is a whole world of law in itself).
Aside: The RIAA argued in court that merely placing one of their copyrighted movies/songs on the Internet counted as distributing their work to the entire world’s (Internet) population and therefore, the defendant should be held liable for billions of copyright violations for each work they merely made available (who cares about the actual number of downloads, right? LOL). THEY ASKED FOR $72 TRILLION IN DAMAGES:
Saying “piracy is theft” is playing right into their hands. Unless you’re a paid corporate shill/bot, you shouldn’t be making arguments on their behalf. At this point you should be asking yourself, “Are we the baddies?”
I’m talking about stealing the IP by using a copy or using the IP in any way. Not necessarily physical object. Your examples doesn’t make sense, because I said if you use it in ways you have no rights. You listed examples where the user has the rights to (the ones with photo).
I am also not talking about piracy. That’s way broader and different topic.
I have no idea what you’re even talking about. The only way possible to “steal IP” is to break into someone’s office/home/whatever and physically take it away. The only copy of that thing that exists.
You know your argument is so weak that you feel you can’t make it without redefining a centuries old term.
If art only has monetary value, its not art, just a product.
Wrong. Art can have monetary value and be sold.
It can be. But if thats the only thing that has value, it is not art.
So the training of their AI on content without permission was theft? Last year, they argued the opposite.
Jokes aside, copyright infringement or license violatipns aren’t theft.
So the training of their AI on content without permission was theft?
yes.
Last year, they argued the opposite.
Doesn’t matter what they said last year.
Jokes aside, copyright infringement or license violatipns aren’t theft.
It is.
Theft noun
the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it
Making a copy does not deprive anyone of their property. Therefore it is not theft. That’s why it’s called a “copyright violation” and isn’t treated the same as theft under the law.
It’s a license theft, not a property in real world.
Just want to give you kudos on some fine trolling, you really got a good few people going for a bit.
Man, you’re just everywhere trying to lick the polish off the fash boots, aren’t you? Are you getting paid for this? It’s difficult to believe someone would have such alarmingly stupid personal opinions and still manage to figure out how to use the internet
But using it privately (for profit) and calling it training data is perfectly fine.
As such that’s all anyone has to say about “their” data. It being used as training data isn’t copyright infringement or IP theft, as they state themselves.
I think you mix up these two things. Regardless of Ai, using copyrighted material (without license) is theft.
No it isn’t theft. It’s copyright infringement, which is decidedly not theft.
These companies used everyone else’s copy written material for “training” but that’s fine because it was only taking that data from everyone. But once someone takes data from them, IP or not, they claim to have been harmed. But don’t claim they’re harming anyone else…somehow.
They’re not paying anyone for their IP, and no one should pay them for their IP. It isn’t a problem for them, so it’s not a problem for anyone else to do it to them.
Do we honestly believe Microsoft doesn’t have ANY IP owned by others in their training data? They’ve managed to completely destroy their own protections, I can’t see how an actually competent Judge could see it any other way. Sure you’ll find corrupt Judges that’ll side with them, but that doesn’t make it correct.
No it isn’t theft. It’s copyright infringement, which is decidedly not theft.
Copyright infringement is theft.
No it isn’t.
Yes it is.
Show the law then, because theft has requirements that copyright infringement doesn’t accomplish.
