←back to thread

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

(theaiunderwriter.substack.com)
1503 points participant3 | 4 comments | 03 Apr 25 17:55 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
mlsu ◴[03 Apr 25 21:55 UTC] No.43575950[source]▶
I was really hoping that the conversation around AI art would at least be partially centered on the perhaps now dated "2008 pirate party" idea that intellectual property, the royalty system, the draconian copyright laws that we have today are deeply silly, rooted in a fiction, and used over and over again, primarily by the rich and powerful, to stifle original ideas and hold back cultural innovation.

Unfortunately, it's just the opposite. It seems most people have fully assimilated the idea that information itself must be entirely subsumed into an oppressive, proprietary, commercial apparatus. That Disney Corp can prevent you from viewing some collection of pixels, because THEY own it, and they know better than you do about the culture and communication that you are and are not allowed to experience.

It's just baffling. If they could, Disney would scan your brain to charge you a nickel every time you thought of Mickey Mouse.

replies(31): >>43576033 #>>43576035 #>>43576039 #>>43576072 #>>43576095 #>>43576129 #>>43576200 #>>43576201 #>>43576223 #>>43576381 #>>43576435 #>>43576475 #>>43576488 #>>43576594 #>>43576625 #>>43576663 #>>43576709 #>>43576768 #>>43576774 #>>43576782 #>>43576815 #>>43576826 #>>43576933 #>>43577120 #>>43577458 #>>43577553 #>>43577827 #>>43577984 #>>43578013 #>>43578038 #>>43581949 #
kokanee ◴[03 Apr 25 22:12 UTC] No.43576095[source]▶
The idea of open sourcing everything and nullifying patents would benefit corporations like Disney and OpenAI vastly more than it would benefit the people. The first thing that would happen is that BigCorp would eat up every interesting or useful piece of art, technology, and culture that has ever been created and monetize the life out of it.

These legal protections are needed by the people. To the Pirate Party's credit, undoing corporate personhood would be a good first step, so that we can focus on enforcing protections for the works of humans. Still, attributing those works to CEOs instead of corporations wouldn't result in much change.

replies(7): >>43576182 #>>43577047 #>>43577068 #>>43577509 #>>43577655 #>>43577930 #>>43590643 #
pixl97 ◴[03 Apr 25 22:22 UTC] No.43576182[source]▶
>The first thing that would happen is that BigCorp would eat up every interesting or useful piece of art, technology, and culture that has ever been created and monetize the life out of it.

Wait, I'm still trying to figure out the difference between your imaginary world and the world we live in now?

replies(2): >>43576377 #>>43577143 #
Lerc ◴[04 Apr 25 00:37 UTC] No.43577143[source]▶
I think the main difference is if everything were freely available they may attempt to monetize the life out of it, but they will fail if they can't actually provide something people actually want. There's no more "You want a thing so you're going to buy our thing because we are the exclusive providers of it. That means we don't even have to make it very good"

If anyone in the world could make a Star Wars movie, the average Star Wars movie would be much worse, but the best 10 Star Wars movies might be better that what we currently have.

replies(1): >>43577220 #
drob518 ◴[04 Apr 25 00:52 UTC] No.43577220[source]▶
I’m sure the best independent Star Wars movie would be infinitely better than what Disney has been shoveling out for the last couple decades.
replies(1): >>43577657 #
1. loki-ai ◴[04 Apr 25 02:16 UTC] No.43577657[source]▶
Such a talented team would be able to make a great movie on the same theme.

Saying the lack of creativity in the industry in because we can't copy things freely is completely moronic.

replies(1): >>43578212 #
2. autoexec ◴[04 Apr 25 04:04 UTC] No.43578212[source]▶
It's a major hindrance. For example, if I came up with an amazing creative idea for a star wars movie I couldn't do a damn thing with it unless Disney told me I could. Disney isn't likely to accept an unsolicited pitch from a total nobody who just happened to have a great idea either. I don't see how you could doubt that there are a lot of great works of art that won't ever exist because of the fact that copyright prevents them from ever getting off the ground.
replies(1): >>43587089 #
3. apersona ◴[04 Apr 25 20:04 UTC] No.43587089[source]▶
You can't do a damn thing with it not because of copyright, but because you don't have the resources to make the movie in the first place.

Copyright can't legally stop you from making a movie about wizards fighting each other with laser swords in space.

replies(1): >>43587177 #
4. autoexec ◴[04 Apr 25 20:15 UTC] No.43587177{3}[source]▶
Copyright can stop me from making a star wars movie about wizards fighting each other with laser swords in space. Even if I don't make a star wars movie, if I make a movie that makes disney feel threatened because it's close enough to being a star wars movie I could still end up losing in courts.

There are plenty of examples of copyright hurting people for creating something that wasn't exactly the same as something else which was copyrighted. Copyright is a threat to all creative works. The bigger the investment required for a creative work, the bigger the risk. For this reason, we see it a lot more often in music where the investment needed is lower than films. People have been successfully sued because they wrote a totally new song that was in the same genre as someone else's song https://abovethelaw.com/2018/03/blurred-lines-can-you-copy-a...