Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9080209" data-attributes="member: 18">I'm sorry, I don't believe US police officers are going to make that subtle distinction. Especially if the people accused of this are of certain backgrounds. I won't say any more about that, let we get into &quot;politics&quot;, but this is high-falutin' nonsense that doesn't typically apply to real life unless everyone involved is wealthy and no-one wants the criminal law to be involved.And an American comparing Britain to Singapore is just next-level hypocrisy, I don't even know what to say to that lol.There's a huge difference in that you can prove that a company did it, and further, those companies actually offered people paid products where they could type in [Artist Name] and it would emulate the style of that artist, directly using data pulled without permission from that artist's work. This isn't human inspiration. This is a machine mathematically crunching how to emulate an artist's style.No. That's a purely self-deluding point of view. It's equivalent to Pope Sixtus IV saying he painted the Sistine Chapel.AI art produced from data sets involving unowned art doesn't look like it's possible to copyright, either, so you don't even own it on that level.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 9080209, member: 18"] I'm sorry, I don't believe US police officers are going to make that subtle distinction. Especially if the people accused of this are of certain backgrounds. I won't say any more about that, let we get into "politics", but this is high-falutin' nonsense that doesn't typically apply to real life unless everyone involved is wealthy and no-one wants the criminal law to be involved. And an American comparing Britain to Singapore is just next-level hypocrisy, I don't even know what to say to that lol. There's a huge difference in that you can prove that a company did it, and further, those companies actually offered people paid products where they could type in [Artist Name] and it would emulate the style of that artist, directly using data pulled without permission from that artist's work. This isn't human inspiration. This is a machine mathematically crunching how to emulate an artist's style. No. That's a purely self-deluding point of view. It's equivalent to Pope Sixtus IV saying he painted the Sistine Chapel. AI art produced from data sets involving unowned art doesn't look like it's possible to copyright, either, so you don't even own it on that level. [/QUOTE]

Verification