←back to thread

An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

(theaiunderwriter.substack.com)
1503 points participant3 | 1 comments | 03 Apr 25 17:55 UTC | HN request time: 0.21s | source
Show context
CamperBob2 ◴[03 Apr 25 19:36 UTC] No.43574347[source]▶
And? What's the model supposed to do? It's just doing what many human artists would do, if they're not explicitly being paid to create new IP.

If infringement is happening, it arguably doesn't happen when an infringing work product is generated (or regurgitated, or whatever you want to call it.) Much less when the model is trained. It's when the output is used commercially -- by a human -- that the liability should rightfully attach.

And it should attach to the human, not the tool.

replies(9): >>43574359 #>>43574421 #>>43574494 #>>43574501 #>>43574545 #>>43574555 #>>43574573 #>>43574601 #>>43575140 #
Carrok ◴[03 Apr 25 19:49 UTC] No.43574501[source]▶
> It's just doing what many human artists would do

I really don't think so. If I paid a human artist to make the prompt in the title, and I didn't explicitly say "Indiana Jones" I would think it should be fairly obvious to the human artist that I do _not_ want Indiana Jones. If they gave me back a picture of, clearly, Indiana Jones, I would ask them why they didn't create something original.

replies(2): >>43574610 #>>43575237 #
1. shadowgovt ◴[03 Apr 25 20:52 UTC] No.43575237[source]▶
Meta-comment: the use of Indiana Jones, a character that was a very intentional throwback to the "Pulp hero explorer" from the childhoods of its creators, in this example to ponder how one would get "Indiana Jones without Indiana Jones" is quite humorous in its own right.

Indiana Jones is already a successful permutation of that approach. He's Zorro, Rick Blaine, and Christopher Leiningen mashed together with their serial numbers filed off.