Two years after the release of ChatGPT, it may not be surprising that creative work is used without permission to power AI products. Yet the notion remains disturbing to many artists and professionals who feel that their craft and livelihoods are threatened by programs. Transparency is generally low: Tech companies tend not to advertise whose work they use to train their products. The legality of training on copyrighted work also remains an open question. Numerous lawsuits have been brought against tech companies by writers, actors, artists, and publishers alleging that their copyrights have been violated in the AI-training process: As Breaking Bad’s creator, Vince Gilligan, wrote to the U.S. Copyright Office last year, generative AI amounts to “an extraordinarily complex and energy-intensive form of plagiarism.” Tech companies have argued that training AI systems on copyrighted work is “fair use,” but a court has yet to rule on this claim. In the language of copyright law, subtitles are likely considered derivative works, and a court would generally see them as protected by the same rules against copying and distribution as the movies they’re taken from. –Alex Reisner, The Atlantic
There’s No Longer Any Doubt That Hollywood Writing Is Powering AI
‘People are rooting for the whale’: the strange American tradition of Moby-Dick reading ma...
Googling Is for Old People. That’s a Problem for Google.
I’m thinking this is a still from the cringey Season 1 episode of TNG where the natives bu...
Each building in my #medievalyork simulation has four levels of detail (so that distant ob...
Another corner building. Designed and textured. Needs an interior. #blender3d #design #ae...
What have my students learned about creative nonfiction writing? During class they are col...