• @givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    If I draw a perfect clone of Donald Duck in the privacy of my home after looking at hundreds of Donald Duck images online, there is nothing wrong with that

    In your picture example it would be an exact copy…

    But even if you started a business and when people asked for a picture of Donald Duck, giving them a traced copy is still copyright infringement… Hell, even your bad analogy of a person’s own drawing, still copyright infringement

    The worst thing about these chatbots is the people who think it’s amazing don’t understand what it’s doing. If you understood it, it wouldn’t be impressive.

    • @Grimy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      06 months ago

      You are missing his point. Is Disney going after the one who is selling the copy online, or are they going after Adobe?

      • @givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        In that analogy, openai is the one selling it, because their the ones using it to prop up their product.

        I didn’t think I needed to explicitly state that, but well, here we are.

        Have a nice life tho. I’m over accounts that stop replying to one thread of replies and then just go and reply to one of my other comments asking me to explain what I’ve already told them.

        Waaaay easier to just never see replies from that account

        • @Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -16 months ago

          Some of us have to work for a living, I can’t reply to every comment the moment it comes in and it seems rude to break the chaine.

          In his analogy, openais product was the tool. You can do the same with both img gen and Photoshop, and neither of these prop up their product by implying it’s easy to copyright infringe. That’s why I said you were missing his point but you do you buddy.