Nightshade: a new tool artists can use to "poison" AI models that scrape their online work

[smulder]

[DukeTrout]

“One small prance for fawn, one great leap for deerkind.”

[anon48584343]

@DukeTrout

Bambi will be safe.

For now….

[smulder]

@anon48584343

Disney why does Bambi have six legs?

… AI can’t count legs, moons, or Bambis

[smulder]

… this is “bambi on saturn”

[gatto]

@orenwolf

This is going to end really badly for genuine indie artists, due to a Byzantine web of laws that were put in place supposedly to protect artists that will, somehow, only enrich corporations rather than those same individual artists.

it’s also possible there might well be some sort of eu, us, or elsewhere divide on that…

i think it’d be interesting, now that disney is in the era of losing some of its more precious properties to the public domain, and that tech companies have an interest in getting legal access to artist’s works, if there was a push to reduce copyright duration

while i think it’s morally questionable to be leveraging people’s works for corporate gain without their consent, it does become more reasonable legally if copyright were only 14 years.

[Mindysan33]

@orenwolf

This is going to end really badly for genuine indie artists, due to a Byzantine web of laws that were put in place supposedly to protect artists that will, somehow, only enrich corporations rather than those same individual artists.

@orenwolf

In other words, Cory’s Eastern Standard Tribe got it exactly right. Shit.

Cory has been telling us this shit for literally years…

@orenwolf

Meanwhile the “state of the art” will cross a point where average folks stop caring if a work was generated by human hands or not

Honestly, plenty of people already have that attitude, prior to these programs being widely available… They don’t see art as coming from talent and hard work, but just some background stuff that is just sort of… there and that they’re entitled to access without the people who made it getting their due? But that’s another byproduct of the capitalist system of mass production. That’s always been a key part of how capitalism functions, by covering up the labor aspect of art… commodity fetishism, something, something, mumble, mumble… Guy DeBord and Walter Benjamin have entered the chat… And Gramsci…

Wasn’t one point that Cory brought up in the Chokepoint book that copyright needs to have strong provisions for reverting back to the original creators? I think that was one solution, especially for the problem of orphan works. But maybe also about working artists who are employed by corporations eventually getting their work back in some way (reversion, or first rights of a buy-back from a corporate entity)?

@Melizmatic

As long as humanity still exists, there will always be those who create.

Whether they can make a decent living off what they create is another story.

We need a better system that doesn’t hurt so many people…

@gatto

while i think it’s morally questionable to be leveraging people’s works for corporate gain without their consent, it does become more reasonable legally if copyright were only 14 years.

Yeah, and the reason why copyright is so very long is precisely for corporations to benefit from it… It’s always spun as protecting families (which, I guess it can), but the primary beneficiaries are the Disneys of the world… 14, with maybe an added term would be MORE than enough time for the original creator to see a profit from their work.

[smulder]

@gatto

a push to reduce copyright duration

… my favorite links whenever that comes up

Researcher: Optimal copyright term is 14 years

The Missing 20th Century: How Copyright Protection Makes Books Vanish