• kava@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    They’re trying to make some type of argument that a private studio should have exclusive rights to a specific style of art and that by openai allowing users to generate art in that style, we are slipping into anti-democratic authoritarianism.

    My opinion is that you can’t own “styles” of art and that there’s nothing wrong here. Legally speaking I can copy any art style I want.

    • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Yeah they want corporations to own styles so the rich can be more powerful, the rich push this sort of propaganda out endlessly

      • Hircine@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        This is just like china, copying stuff, or rather called steeling. the original companies need to build their brand and style for decades and spend 100s of millions to improving to perfection. then we have AI just copying it in matter of minutes.

        and you think 1 person should be able to steel all this work and legacy from 1000s of employees because its “protecting the rich”?

        • kava@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          first let’s get something out of the way

          the actual way that copyright works is that a few giant megacorps buy up everything and they end up owning copyrights to the vast majority of recognizable content.

          so for example in 2019 over half of the movies released in theaters was owned by Disney. The same company that unilaterally has the ability to change US federal law when convenient for them.

          studio ghibli is no different- they’re a subsidiary of Nippon Television which has a $2B+ annual revenue

          so keep in mind when you advocate here for stronger copyright protections, you are essentially saying that the biggest companies in the world deserve more money.

          2nd- the “style” is not copyrightable. anybody can mimic the style. and guess what? if I make a cartoon and I make it look like studio ghibli style… people are still gonna recognize it as “studio ghibli” style. they are basically getting free marketing. they are not losing out here.

          • emberinmoss@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            Anyone who doubles down this hard to defend AI art theft machines fucking hates human artists, who are a branch of intellectuals. Nazis are known to openly hate, abuse the rights of and mistreat intellectuals. Fuck kava.

            • kava@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              You may or may not be correct in hating me but do not let my comments bring down the good name of kava

              As for “doubling down so hard” I’d flip the message and ask you why you are simping for mega corps? simping for mega corps is about as fascist as you can get- a populist ideology idolizing elites

              An AI is not doing anything a human wouldn’t do. You look at a bunch of content. You learn from it and incorporate it in new synthesis.

              It’s not fundamentally different. So unless you can make a meaningful statement (beyond mild personal attacks) that illustrates the difference between the two, you will convince no-one