That’s rich coming from a country with no proper copyright laws & a copyright monster by the name Nintendo
Japan’s copyright law is very similar to the US, so I’m not sure what you’re referring to.
You’re replying to a pizza cutter.
All edge and no point.
Oooooo that’s a really good insult
Japan’s copyright law is very similar to the US
That’s exactly what he’s referring to lol
I just don’t really understand the point they’re trying to make. Japan is responding to OpenAI, which is a US company. They have the same copyright laws. None of the parties involved have any kind of edge over the other w.r.t. copyright law.
which is why their laws aren’t proper copyright laws, yes
That both are copyright monsters which should be ignored as much as possible until they die out.
Disney is even worse than Nintendo.
Come on Japan, what’s a bit of culture for AGI/ASI! Don’t you want to save the planet? /$
This is obviously sarcasm, OpenAI just wants more money, namely the exact OPPOSITE of what it was founded for.
Automated garbage internet
deleted by creator
japan:
- people make rule34 porn of underage children: “i sleep”
- people make unsanctioned videos of characters from mega-corps like nintendo doing stupid stuff: “i weep”
always interesting to see where their priorities lie.
Drawings, as long as they’re easy to differentiate from reality, should be fine. Otherwise we will continue to slide down on the slippery slope of censorship of adult content, and one day short women and lack of a pubic hair will also be considered CSAM (I knew people who did so).
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Insane that that’s your takeaway from this post. This had nothing to do with underage children, so why is your mind already there? So fucking weird.
AI is like stealing a brick from everyone in your town to build your own house. As a medical writer it has absolutely destroyed my business.
And build it seeming convincingly well before it falls apart once a storm passes by.
i heard it pretty much ruined some career of corporate writers, on certain subs, although i dont know the extent of it. on one post, the user said the company was pretty much okay with the fact that thier low-quality AI generated writings will result in less clientele and less revenue, but no overhead of hiring an outside writer
Yeah. So medical writers have it really rough. I was making $100k+ last year. I just exhausted unemployment. The problem is that you can feed AI a list of approved claims and basically feed it a ton of examples and it gets 85% of the way there. Of course it’s ripping off our work to do that, but cash is king. I haven’t checked in a bit, but website traffic was down 90%. So, they essentially lost millions to save $100k.
Are we talking about pages like webmd?
More like a claims database. We relied a lot on PubMed, which hosts a wealth of clinical data, original research, case studies, systematic reviews, etc. I love PubMed. It’s the Brooklyn Bridge of peer-reviewed stuff.
oh yea, i used ncbi/pubmd to look for articles, and then search for the whole research article on places like researchgate. from the job search site, ai also ruining peoples ability to get interviewed, because AI is used to screen applicants, and applicants using it to make hordes of “resume”
WEBMD is pretty much ecyclopedia for diseases, something you can use wikipedia for too.i think medical writer, would write something to be approvable or not by the insurance or billing.
how is that relevant to AI; Minors AND nintendo doing some IP nazi stuff is not the same as AI stealing content.
The fact that you’re trying to drag completely irrelevant shit into it about paedophilia, shows how staggeringly weak the pro-OpenAI argument is.
yeah like he gaf
Same country that just gave Nintendo a patent for a generic game idea thay has been in wide use for years. Yeah… this is strictly about profits from their anime industry. Japan is just as much of a capitalist dystopia as the US is. Though if they manage to hurt the AI ‘industry’ - nice, I guess?
“this is strictly about profits from their anime industry.”
ya dont say?
OpenAI is copyright infringement.
Didn’t Japan rule that AI was fine to infringe copyright to train? Why are they complaining now?
I guess that cost a few dinners and holidays, maybe even some fancy tech stuff. But probably took them to some conference, where they showcased “what AI will be capable in just a few years, only if they could train it on copyrighted material”.
The argument for training an AI on copyright materials is different than the argument for allowing it to generate and distribute copyright infringing materials.
its okay if they did it, but not okay if a outsider does it.-japan
Japan didn’t think the face eating leopards would eat their face.
Everyone here is either on the side of hating big AI companies or hating IP law. I proudly hate both.
We need two things:
- much shorter copyright and patent durations, like 14 and 5 years respectively (14 comes from OG copyright duration)
- stronger enforcement of copyright to protect creators from AI stealing their work
They should happen in that order, and ideally copyright would only be awarded to individuals (or perhaps specifically named lists of individuals, with some reasonable cap), not corporations. The current system is absolutely bonkers.
They should happen in that order, and ideally copyright would only be awarded to individuals (or perhaps specifically named lists of individuals, with some reasonable cap), not corporations.
That’s actually the law in Germany. Here it’s not called copyright but originator’s right. The big caveat being that things you create while under contract are licensed to companies. But the originator’s rights can not be transferred or erased.
Of course international contracts severely muddy the waters here.
That’s how it should be, and that’s awesome that Germany does that!
I disagree, because I think all of these things address the wrong problem.
Individuals should be able to gain from their own inventions, and others shouldn’t be able to force them into poverty by stealing their IP. Corporations especially should not be incentivised to do that.
Then again, unfettered capitalism is geared towards incentivising corporations to do that.
The answer isn’t to weaken people’s already vanishing IP, but to change what’s incentivised. Also to stop treating corporations as people. They aren’t.
The answer isn’t to weaken people’s already vanishing IP, but to change what’s incentivised.
IP protections are stronger than ever! If you write a novel and a company takes that without making a deal with you, almost any law firm will take that case with no payment until you get a massive settlement/judgement. You need to have evidence, of course, but IP is one thing the courts take very seriously.
Protecting IP is not an issue, the issue is the protections last way too long and are generally owned by corporations through employment contracts. I don’t think that should be legal. Instead, you should only be allowed to grant your employer a perpetual, royalty-free license to use your work and perhaps a noncompete for some reasonable time after (i.e. can’t license your work to specific competitors), and that agreement should be void if they terminate your contract unlawfully. The creator should always be able to use their creations for their own benefit.
But yeah, the real issue is incentives, and this dramatically changes incentives. Instead of a company like Disney milking their IPs for decades, they’ll need to continue to innovate because they can’t rely on courts to preserve their monopoly. Pokemon was created about 30 years ago and fans have continually complained about the state of the IP (games are samey and whatnot), so it’s high time they have some competition with that IP. Likewise for so many other popular IPs that companies just sit on and milk and only innovate when that stops being profitable.
If you change the IP structure, you’ll see a big shift in the creative market.
Making it so corporations cannot directly own some random valuable thing?
It’s a nice thing to think about, but it has 0% chance of happening in our current system.
They kind of could. They could employ someone to own the copyright, and pay them handsomely to retain control of that copyright.
That’s honestly how it should be. The same should be true for patents.
Trademark, however, should be company controlled.
Oh I didn’t mean that it couldn’t be done. Just that it wouldn’t be. The people who control such things are actively moving our system in the opposite direction.
Not without a populist movement, no.
And IMO, it shouldn’t be our top priority either. We should focus on electoral reform so it’s easier to get decent representatives in office, making it easier to pass stuff like this.
But remember piracy is legal for the big AI companies.
$1.5b judgement against Anthropic for it (not paid yet of course, gotta see how it plays from here)
This is the way
2 wrongs don’t make a right, I did enjoy
- Theft! A History of Music https://web.law.duke.edu/musiccomic/
- Tales from the Public Domain: BOUND BY LAW? https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/comics/
on the topic.
It’s a “heads-I-win / tails-you-lose” system when business can violently extract the value of labor coming and going.
Either the state protects owners of IP (inevitably a business entity looking to collect rents on its use) or it facilitates robbing the original artist (inevitably a talented individual/team that lacks the money for a lengthy legal fight). The legal system never seems to break in favor of the people themselves. It can only exist as a gradient to move wealth from the sweet of one’s brow to the pocket of one’s bosses.
Japan has some of the worst copyright and fair use laws in the world.
Satire is often times considered copy right infringing.
I wouldn’t say they’re worse. I’d say they’re confusing as hell.
For example: fan manga are absolutely okay.
Fan manga and other doujin works usually depends on the original copyright holder for enforcement.
Some are pretty open for any fanworks being commercialized as long it’s limited and case by case basis. For example, Love Live franchise allows doujin manga and other doujinshi works, but not with fanmerch. Serial Experiments Lain generally allows various stuff, but not R18 content. Some others like Yakitate Japan mangaka just happy seing his works have so many adult doujin manga, and even lining up on Comiket buying them.
I’m amazed that these shady chatbot apps aren’t getting sued to death. I see ads all the time for Simpsons, Family Guy, Incredibles characters and I’m like “Disney is going to murder you.”
Disney bought into a long history of Fox animated properties being lax in infringement enforcement online.
But this is a whole different level. That’s where I agree with you.
They’ll wait until the bubble bursts (or OpenAI shows signs of weakness) and then they’ll eat it alive.
It’s not profitable to go after them when the government is tweeting out Pokémon ICE commercials and the president is making deepfakes of himself.
And the other government with large contributors is China and intellectual property rights have never been strong there. Walk around a tech startup in China and you’ll see plenty of posters they’ve made with their products and with the faces of Elon Musk or Steve Jobs there as if they’re endorsing or part of the product
they use westerners, even hiring white people to be the face of thier company, its to "legitimize thier shady companies its very common. they make the westerners go to events and pretend like they own it, but not do anything for the companies internal workings. thats why alot of products on amazon that are from china uses white people in thier ads.
And the other government with large contributors is China and intellectual property rights have never been strong there. Walk around a startup and you’ll see plenty of posters they’re made with their products and with the faces of Elon Musk or Steve Jobs there as if they’re endorsing or part of the product
NVIDIA will want thier investment back at some point too. oracle is going to be left holding the bag on all the useless datacenters they built.
They will just make deal with OpenAI that benefit both sides while all the small players get crushed. Same as with all types of media…
Why are you seeing ads?
On mobile most of the time.
No adblock?
Nah, not worth the trouble most of the time. I use it in my browser, but not at the app level.
“Irreplaceable treasures”
ROFL!
I don’t think these companies give a shit 😥. If it means US companies fall behind the White House is going to aide with these companies and allow it. Or hostilely take over your company like they’re doing with Tiktok.
Hate for AI vs hate for big corporations and copyright laws. Which thing that they hate will Lemmy members defend passionately?
If we had a fair distribution of wealth I wouldn’t care about either of these really.
Most artists care about attribution/fame somewhat but if they could live comfortably they wouldn’t care about royalties much or others using their art.
Likewise for AI, automation is an amazing thing for civilization but when it is gatekeeped and used to make the rich richer it’s just exploitation of workers everywhere since they have to work as hard as they did one century ago with, arguably, less buying power.
If we had a fair distribution of wealth I wouldn’t care about either of these really.
A “fair distribution of wealth” isn’t really a thing though. What you likely consider “fair” is most likely “not fair” to high income earners, correct?
Yes and idfaf. Work as much as you want to. No one gets a second home before everyone has at least one. That’s my position.
Likely, whatever benefits the little guy. Most people don’t have a problem with copyright laws in a vacuum. It’s the abuse of those by large corporate entities that are the issue.
Well in this case there’ s no question - OpenAI benefit the “little guy” more.
AI companies are not on the side of copyright reform or abolition. They just want an exception for themselves. They very much believe in trade secrets. They probably want copyright to eventually cover the current grey areas so that they can stop pretending they give a damn about open models.
It’s not unreasonable to demand AI companies to play by the same rules as everyone else.
It’s not unreasonable to demand AI companies to play by the same rules as everyone else.
But when you hate those very rules, shouldn’t you be cheering on the people that are seemingly ignoring them and are likely to try and challenge them in court/lobby to be changed/removed? Right? “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” and all that?
Oh, but not when those people are evil capitalist companies that make AI product lol.
Like I said, the AI companies are not on the same side. The AI companies in the fight for their own selfish reasons. They’re eventually just going to make the copyright situation even more byzantine. They also make the copyright reform/abolition people look bad.
It’s like if I say I’m an Anarchist and then I have to constantly say “well actually I don’t advocate for looting and vandalism nonsense, those dipshits don’t know shit about Anarchism”. Do you know how hard it is to advocate for more reasonable copyright policy reflecting modern times, when the current big crisis in the mind of artists and creators are the dipshit companies blatantly violating the law?
One issue is that they’re not blatantly violating the law though. There’s no law saying you can’t create art etc of copyrighted material. It’s legal basically unless you’re then selling it.
With training AI models, again there’s nothing illegal about that. Some companies and people want it to be illegal, but it currently isn’t and realistically never should be since laws exist around the use of copyrighted content (as mentioned above). Why should it matter if it’s a computer doing the “learning” compared to a person?
It’s what you do with the content that is controlled by law, not how you created it.
I am cool with everything stuffed into AI and freely distributed, whatever the form. Bluntly, I think copyright sucks, and want it gone. Nintendo shouldn’t be able to patent game mechanics, and I would like to see more mashups of things.
I agree that I should be able to use whatever you make and sell it for money without crediting you because I’m a human just like you. We’re basically related so whatever you make is also mine because we’re pretty try much the same person.
Ah, a man of culture - DBZ Team Training is a classic. I also hear good things about Super Mariomon, though I haven’t tried it yet myself.
I will support the elimination of copyright. But, as long as copyright exists, I will reject and resist AI.
That said, there are a number of other reasons I think AI sucks, it’s not limited to copyright.
i support elimination of IP copyright for medications, lessen the time for other forms of IP, like movie/show franchises.
I don’t think copyright is currently serving it’s purpose “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts”. And it should be eliminated anywhere it is not doing that.
Closest to my pocketbook is software (I’m a programmer), and I think we’d almost certainly be better off without copyright of any kind on software. It would mean exercise of some of our freedom around software would have to be implemented via reverse engineering, but it would make that route much more available / less risky for software that is current not Free Software. But, maybe I’m extra jaded because software is almost always done as “work-for-hire” so the author doesn’t actually hold the copyright, the Capitalist employer does.
I support the elimination of copyright in it’s current form
The way it was initially was fine IMO: 14 years, with an option to renew it at the end of those 14 years. ONCE.
Now in terms of patenting medications, if it was partially paid for with public money it’s the public’s patent. In other words it’s open for everyone. Made a new medication but took a government grant to help fund it? It’s public when it comes out, enjoy a nice hearty reward check for your efforts.
Nintendo shouldn’t be able to patent game mechanics
Those are patents, not copyrights. There are a bunch of different forms of intellectual property. Off the top of my head:
-
Copyright
-
Trademark
-
Patent
-
Moral (not very substantial in the US, but more-meaningful in France)
IMO, the way it should be is that concepts and art should be free to be used by anyone. However, specific incarnations made someone can’t be copied. For example, Nintendo can make a Pokemon game, as can Sega with the same characters. Naturally, Nintendo can make a Shin Megami Mario game.
The important thing is that the company or people behind an incarnation is distinctly labelled, so that people can’t confuse who made what. In this way, variants of a media can fulfill niches that otherwise wouldn’t be possible. Say, for example, a WoodRocket “Jessie Does James” hentai anime.
Once you start studying non capitalist propaganda, the idea of “intellectual property” becomes transparently harmful. Copyrights don’t protect ideas, they protect the wealth of rich people.
Indeed. I’m not against copyrights owned by individuals. Corporations owning rights is downright dystopian.
I’m not even sure that IP being owned by non-natural persons is the problem, for example I could see a coop collectively owning copyrights/patents relevant to their work. The problem is the frankly ridiculous amount of time granted for copyrights and obvious methods being patented.
Change both of those and you keep the benefit of innovative individuals/small groups having legal protection from large corporations muscling in and stealing their work and get rid of most of the damage done by the current system.
So, we can use Donald Duck, but not Harry Potter? I don’t quite understand why. Why shouldn’t I be allowed to write my own Harry Potter books? (not that I would).
I have, in the past, kind of wished that settings and characters could not be copyrighted. I realize that there’s work that goes into creating each, but I think that we could still live in a world where those weren’t protected and interesting stuff still gets created. If that were to happen, then I agree, it’d be necessary to make it very clear who created what, since the setting and characters alone wouldn’t uniquely identify the source.
Like, there are things like Greek mythology or the Robin Hood collection of stories, very important works of art from our past, that were created by many different unaffiliated people. They just couldn’t be created today with our modern stories, because the settings and characters would be copyrighted and most rightsholders don’t just offer a blanket grant of rights to use them.
That’s actually one unusual and notable thing H.P. Lovecraft did — if you’ve ever seen stuff in the Cthulhu Mythos, that’s him. He encouraged anyone who wanted to do so to create stuff using his universe. One reason why we have that kind of collection of Lovecraftian stuff.
But you can’t do that with, say, Star Wars or a lot of other beloved settings.
The Touhou franchise strikes me as the modern Lovecraft. People are creating fangames, and go on to make them into commercial products. Around the 22nd or thereabout, “Shrine Maiden Wars” will be released, which is a take on the Super Robot Wars formula, but with the Touhou cast. It is an incredibly vibrant ecosystem of fanworks, where most people get to have fun AND profit.
Touhou Luna Nights Is such a Fun Game! It was the first Touhou Game I played because I’m don’t like Bullet Hell’s. If someone reads this and is into Metroidvanias, give it a shot!
I probably will get it when Turkey Day rolls around. Anyhow, counter-suggestion: Check out La-Mulana if you like puzzles with your Metroidvania. They are extremely long and difficult games, but is worth your time if you got the lateral thinking to puzzle out the riddles and enjoy things like King’s Quest.
Looks interesting, I will check it out during Christmas vacation. Thanks!
It should fall under more general laws against fraud. The main harm in copyright violation is copying something and claiming to be the original author, thereby stealing credit for it. If a reasonable person would mistake your product as coming from the original source, then you have committed fraud and should be held liable for damages.
However, if you make a spinoff and it’s obviously distinct such that a reasonable person wouldn’t mistake your work as coming from the original creator, that should be protected.
So yeah, if I want to make a Pokemon game and it is very distinct from anything The Pokemon Company has worked on (either directly or indirectly), then it should be totally fine. The only copyright violation is if I directly copy any artwork, but if I produce my own renditions, I should be in the clear.
-
