• chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    I don’t think it’s actually such a bad argument because to reject it you basically have to say that style should fall under copyright protections, at least conditionally, which is absurd and has obvious dystopian implications. This isn’t what copyright was meant for. People want AI banned or inhibited for separate reasons and hope the copyright argument is a path to that, but even if successful wouldn’t actually change much except to make the other large corporations that own most copyright stakeholders of AI systems. That’s not actually a better circumstance.

    • tacobellhop@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      Actually I would just make the guard rails such that if the input can’t be copyrighted then the ai output can’t be copyrighted either. Making anything it touches public domain would reel in the corporations enthusiasm for its replacing humans.