I actually disagree. I already wrote this elsewhere. My point here is that I consider modern AI models, because of their enormous size, to be on a similar model as human authorship. Any human always stands on the ones that came before them and it’s usually impossible to tell where exactly inspiration came from and with AI’s like ChatGPT it’s very similar. Now, I absolutely hate to see corporations profiting off of the commons and I also think there is a still a lot to be done in our relationship with this new technology. But suits like this are silly. How do you quantify a single author’s impact on an AI model? Or on a single answer? It’s, currently, impossible to do so, just like with a human author. What I very much fear as the outcome of stupid lawsuits like this is even more and harsher copyright laws. We desperately need less copyright instead of more.
I actually disagree. I already wrote this elsewhere. My point here is that I consider modern AI models, because of their enormous size, to be on a similar model as human authorship. Any human always stands on the ones that came before them and it’s usually impossible to tell where exactly inspiration came from and with AI’s like ChatGPT it’s very similar. Now, I absolutely hate to see corporations profiting off of the commons and I also think there is a still a lot to be done in our relationship with this new technology. But suits like this are silly. How do you quantify a single author’s impact on an AI model? Or on a single answer? It’s, currently, impossible to do so, just like with a human author. What I very much fear as the outcome of stupid lawsuits like this is even more and harsher copyright laws. We desperately need less copyright instead of more.