AI/LLMs Plagiarism vs. Inspiration

[TheAlkaizer]

I think when you hear an idea and you think to yourself, I need a way to express that in my game system, then you create your own mechanic, that is inspiration.

"Inspiration" as you describe it is incredibly rare. Art is derivative by nature. If you think you've invented something, you probably didn't. You're at least unconsciously pulling from experiences you probably don't even remember.

When you hear an idea like, critical hits are determined by rolling 3d6 and any roll above 12 is a crit.... and that becomes your rule for critical hits, then you are plagiarising.

No, you're not. And this is exactly why game mechanics are not copyrightable. You can't copyright cutting potatoes length-wise with a knife, you also can't copyright rolling three six sided dices, you also can't copyright checking if you have a total of 14 or more. This is obviously absurd. Game mechanics are algorithms, they're a succession of atomic steps.

Derivative work is like rolling 3d6 and taking any roll above 14.

It's all derivative. Your 600 pages are derivative.

Since neither are copyrightable, where is the moral high ground, or even the difference for that matter?

The difference is simple. Creators in the TTRPG scene are doing synthesis. They grab mismatched ideas and mechanics that yield desirable game dynamics and try to create something new with it. It's a natural and derivative part of the artistic process, and it is done with intent. Intent is a crucial and necessary part for something to be design. And very often, you'll see inspirations and references detailed in these products. I mean, Appendix-N?

What AI is doing is grabbing absolutely everything that is accessible, copyrightable material or not, blends it together and regurgitates it. There's no intent. When you look at the slop that comes out at the other end, it's difficult to make out any individual source of data. But it's there, they've admitted it themselves.

And you absolutely have to recognize that the dreadful efficiency of AI models to swallow data does change everything. A lot of people will bring up the argument of "well people do the same thing, just much slower". Yes, in some way they do. But if I complain that hellish machinery is cutting blank whole swathes of forests with a terrifying efficiency, and your argument is "Well, when you take an axe and cut a tree it's the same thing" then you're not thinking clearly.

Now, I'm not against AI. I use it in certain context and I think it has great potential. But the current focus of the whole industry is misaligned and motivated by speculation. AI will be great for things much more boring and benign than generating art instead of humans.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I highly suspect that those data centers serve an alternate purpose, henceforth why they are building soo many.

Nope. Texas currently has 400 AI data centers (#1 nationwide) with estimates of another 100-140 under construction.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Let’s just say I view that with the same critical eye as when I look at certain dubious financial ecosystems like “Hollywood Accounting”, “supply-side economics”, “sub-prime lending” and others I was formally educated about in my economics & law programs.

Huh.

I find that a strange response. I could see the argument that Dario is simply lying. But what he is describing is not a financial trick.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Huh.

I find that a strange response. I could see the argument that Dario is simply lying. But what he is describing is not a financial trick.

To clarify, I don’t trust the claims that someone with a vested interest in having AI be profitable saying that his actually is on his books. I’d have more faith in a similar claim from someone doing an independent financial analysis.

 

[1QD]

Is it moral for me to do the macarena or the hammerdance at a party without first attributing them to Los Del Rio or MC Hammer and paying them a royalty? I don't understand how you fail to understand that your entire premise is incredibly flawed in spite of having it pointed out repeatedly. Your definition of what is moral is not one that society at large recognizes. If someone has a good idea and does something, then they can't claim a monopoly on the idea. Of course people will either imitate, reverse engineer, or build off of that idea, if its actually good.

Or do you not actually have any confidence in your idea, so you'd rather imagine that it's brilliant rather than put it to the test by putting it out there? What if nobody cares, nobody pays attention and nobody imitates it at all?

The difference is, I do believe it is a moral issue. For the same reason plagiarism is frowned upon. I do believe that ideas are being circulated without benefit to the original creator. It is not a legal requirement for me to hold a door for someone, but regardless, I choose to do so anyway. Morally, it is the right thing to do.

Monopoly on the idea, no I do not think they should, yet early days of old school DnD and you had them suing left right and center whether they were in the right or not. I think today's more open ended licensing has shown the change, but it does not erase a long history held by that system.

"Or do you not actually have any confidence in your idea, so you'd rather imagine that it's brilliant rather than put it to the test by putting it out there?"

I have confidence in my product, most certainly. In my own circles I have had it well received, henceforth why I am graduating towards the next step. The community however is more the concern. I have watched on other forums where an idea is mentioned and suddenly the h8 rain begins to pour. One disliked mechanic and suddenly , "I don't like that so I'll pass" And I get it, that is the reality of the scene. Life is hard etc etc. Hell I had someone tell me they would never buy my book because I wouldn't give my name ffs.

"What if nobody cares, nobody pays attention and nobody imitates it at all?"

Realistically that is a risk regardless, just like above, maybe no one likes it. But I have been running this game for a long time, my current campaign is 12 years strong, every single weekend, friends don't just buy one book they buy multiple. I have been to conventions, and been very well received, I have had store owners see my product in action and literally tell me I am sitting on a gold mine. People who owe me nothing. And so, here I am. Loved, Hated, I am doing it regardless.

 

[Desdichado]

Let’s just say I view that with the same critical eye as when I look at certain dubious financial ecosystems like “Hollywood Accounting”, “supply-side economics”, “sub-prime lending” and others I was formally educated about in my economics & law programs.

Yeah, and if you read stuff like Ed Zitron's substack, he starts to point out with alarming or amusing (depending on your perspective) precision exactly where the AI Accounting fails.

 

[Desdichado]

The difference is, I do believe it is a moral issue. For the same reason plagiarism is frowned upon. I do believe that ideas are being circulated without benefit to the original creator. It is not a legal requirement for me to hold a door for someone, but regardless, I choose to do so anyway. Morally, it is the right thing to do.

Yes, I think everyone gets that you believe that. What is perhaps a bit more mystifying is why you don't get that society at large, and for the most part, everyone in this thread, is telling you, "no it isn't."

 

[FrogReaver]

I have confidence in my product, most certainly. In my own circles I have had it well received, henceforth why I am graduating towards the next step. The community however is more the concern. I have watched on other forums where an idea is mentioned and suddenly the h8 rain begins to pour. One disliked mechanic and suddenly , "I don't like that so I'll pass" And I get it, that is the reality of the scene. Life is hard etc etc. Hell I had someone tell me they would never buy my book because I wouldn't give my name ffs.

My advice.

Unless you want heavy criticism about seemingly minor issues found in the product and almost no actual verbal praise or constructive criticism, then you are going to want to avoid forums as your primary source of interaction. Maybe an official one curated specifically toward your game would be fine.

 

[Bill Zebub]

The difference is, I do believe it is a moral issue. For the same reason plagiarism is frowned upon. I do believe that ideas are being circulated without benefit to the original creator. It is not a legal requirement for me to hold a door for someone, but regardless, I choose to do so anyway. Morally, it is the right thing to do.

When you do publish your game, will you have attributed any mechanics that you have derived from other games?

 

[FrogReaver]

Yes, I think everyone gets that you believe that. What is perhaps a bit more mystifying is why you don't get that society at large, and for the most part, everyone in this thread, is telling you, "no it isn't."

Which of his premises do you actually disagree with?