tante,
@tante@tldr.nettime.org avatar

Really disappointing to see CreativeCommons argue that "generative AI" on the basis of the appropriation of cultural works often against their creators' wishes is somehow like remixing and in the "public interest".
https://creativecommons.org/2023/02/06/better-sharing-for-generative-ai/

tante,
@tante@tldr.nettime.org avatar

There's a massive difference between putting your own works under CC licenses to be used for remix etc. and corporations and their henchmen just grabbing everything without regard for who they hurt.

kkarhan,

@tante The problem is #PowerAsymetry:

Even if a corporation is engaging in blatant copyright violations @senficon has done so long ago: https://felixreda.eu/2021/07/github-copilot-is-not-infringing-your-copyright/ ] the one who's rights have been violated has to invest time, money and lawyer up.

And they'll most likely not even see a reimbursement of costs.

kkarhan,

@tante People like @tomscott have gone through that systemic crap already.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jwo5qc78QU

kkarhan,

@tante or to sum it up like #CGPgrey did:

#Copyright as it exists today solely serves #Corporations and their #profit motives, neither #creatives nor #society...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk862BbjWx4

ki,
@ki@chaos.social avatar

@tante
As far as I understand, there is no way to use CC-BY with generative AI because you can't accurately cite sources.

haverholm,

@tante Seems CC assume that "AI" is a friendly sentient cloud that floats around the internet in an ongoing remix session to make people dance and be happy 🤦

XavCC,
@XavCC@todon.eu avatar
tante,
@tante@tldr.nettime.org avatar

@XavCC thank you! Great thread

antinomy,

@tante I can see their argument for works licensed with remixing permitted, but are they going to help support and enforce the rights of creators who specifically withheld that permission?

tante,
@tante@tldr.nettime.org avatar

@antinomy feels very much that that would be a no

antinomy,

@tante My standard copyleft licence is non-commercial no-remix and in my view AI learning set use breaks both those conditions without ambiguity.

tante,
@tante@tldr.nettime.org avatar

@antinomy at least the no-remix clause is definitely violated

StephanSchulz,
@StephanSchulz@fosstodon.org avatar

@tante If companies (or anybody) grab CC or other copyleft material for training AIs, I think that is morally ok as long as they make it clear that the results are under the same license. And that may mean "no commercial use" or "free to distribute and reuse". And it becomes really interesting in the case of GPLed software...

eobet,

@tante I guess they’re fishing for corporate donations? 🤢 Hey @dansup can you create a -NOAI- license variation for @pixelfed that one can add to uploads?

dansup,
@dansup@mastodon.social avatar

@eobet @tante @pixelfed I’m wondering if it would be worthwhile to add a profile setting one could enable that would apply this to all existing and future uploads in addition to per post licenses!

Let me know what you think, and do you mind if I reference your post for docs/marketing to give you attribution for this feature idea?

eobet,

@dansup @tante @pixelfed both options sound good and please go ahead! Thank you. 👍

pixelfed,
@pixelfed@mastodon.social avatar

@eobet @tante @dansup Great idea!

simulo,
@simulo@hci.social avatar

@tante

Great examples for creativity and public interest:

  • musicians remixing
  • artists varying motives
  • massive data harvesting
  • sharing fanfics
tante,
@tante@tldr.nettime.org avatar

@simulo Yes. I am not saying that "remixing" cannot be for the public interest.

But there is a massive difference between an artist taking a piece of work and intentionally transform/build on it and a corporation sucking in all data possible to generate boatloads of shit for profit.

simulo,
@simulo@hci.social avatar

@tante I absolutely agree with you, the point was that "massive data harvesting" is not like the others and is not included in the usual "CC enables people to do great stuff" examples.

AlexVoss,
@AlexVoss@fosstodon.org avatar

@tante @simulo „shit“ being the operative word here - this is my main objection and might give me cause to remix CC for my own work

bhaggart,

@tante Disappointing, but no surprising, as someone else said. The generative AI debate is definitely highlighting some longstanding blindspots held by previously untouchable champions of the internet, namely a lack of concern with private power and a belief that openness cures all. See also: EFF and Facebook/Cambridge Analytica.

alper,
@alper@rls.social avatar

@tante Not at all surprising.

elmyra,
@elmyra@wandering.shop avatar

@tante oh. Oh no.

tante,
@tante@tldr.nettime.org avatar

@elmyra It's so bad.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • DreamBathrooms
  • everett
  • InstantRegret
  • magazineikmin
  • thenastyranch
  • rosin
  • Durango
  • ethstaker
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • khanakhh
  • kavyap
  • ngwrru68w68
  • osvaldo12
  • JUstTest
  • tacticalgear
  • cubers
  • cisconetworking
  • anitta
  • provamag3
  • modclub
  • mdbf
  • GTA5RPClips
  • tester
  • megavids
  • normalnudes
  • Leos
  • lostlight
  • All magazines