jack the nonabrasive's latest activity
- 2y ·
-
Public·
-
mastodon.social
{"p":"","h":{"iv":"ROXSYW+cfvEbFHu5","at":"ocxplSQjdRC3tXEtB/9/wg=="}}
@darius @irwin Yet the output of a generative ML model isn’t copyrightable. It seems like, if this becomes precedent, holding a bot creator who uses generative tech to create the bot output is a wedge that could be used to pressure copyright for generative tech.
Which might not be desirable. Unless it’s a derivative work and the author owes royalties to holders of copyright on the training corpus?
…See more
@darius @irwin Yet the output of a generative ML model isn’t copyrightable. It seems like, if this becomes precedent, holding a bot creator who uses generative tech to create the bot output is a wedge that could be used to pressure copyright for generative tech.
Which might not be desirable. Unless it’s a derivative work and the author owes royalties to holders of copyright on the training corpus?
See less
@darius @irwin Yet the output of a generative ML model isn’t copyrightable. It seems like, if this becomes precedent, holding a bot creator who uses generative tech to create the bot output is a wedge that could be used to pressure copyright for generative tech.
Which might not be desirable. Unless it’s a derivative work and the author owes royalties to holders of copyright on the training corpus?
@darius @irwin Yet the output of a generative ML model isn’t copyrightable. It seems like, if this becomes precedent, holding a bot creator who uses generative tech to create the bot output is a wedge that could be used to pressure copyright for generative tech.
Which might not be desirable. Unless it’s a derivative work and the author owes royalties to holders of copyright on the training corpus?