Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 9891087" data-attributes="member: 19675">Everything created by humans starts with an idea.  If you can’t expound on anyone else’s idea ever, you get stagnation.<img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷🏾‍♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-1f3fe-2642.png" title="Man shrugging: medium-dark skin tone    :man_shrugging_tone4:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging_tone4:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" />So the starting point- for me, at least- is attribution.  Acknowledgment of where the idea originated is the moral baseline.  The second stage would be compensation, if legally required.  It’s also nice if you do so when you don’t have to, but I don’t know that there’s any moral weight to that.  There is definitely a reputational positive to it, though.There is also a general reputational positive to acquiescing to an originator’s requests that have no legal force behind them.  For example, one of the reasons why Weird Al Yankovic is so highly regarded is that he won’t parody songs if the original performers don’t want him to.In the context of AI training, none of this is happening.  AIs are trained on copyrighted materials as if they were in the public domain- without compensation.  AI programmers don’t acknowledge the conceptual origins of their programs’ abilities, even when it’s painfully obvious.  Etc.</blockquote>