OpenAI defends model training practices in response
1 Oct 30 1:49 AM · 13d ago · 2 articles · 1 post · 3 sources · development 1 of 1
An OpenAI spokesperson stated the company is having "productive conversations" with rightsholders and emphasized that models are trained on various sources. The company noted that copyright holders can submit disputes directly.
“We're having productive conversations with rightsholders around the world about supporting creativity, including fan art, while protecting intellectual property and taking appropriate action in response to copyright complaints.”
OpenAIAxel Scheffler Gruffalo illustratorOpenAI AI companyPenguin Random House Publishing groupNick Buckland IP lawyer, Lewis Silkin
The whole story articlesposts the bright band is this development · numbered dots are the others · click one to jump
Reported in the same hours no headline names this development itself — these 1 claim were published in its stretch
-
first by JournalArta, 13d ago · also BBC
1 more headline
- Gruffalo illustrator considering legal action against AI firms Mastodon · 12d ago
What people said 21 voices · best of 22 · verbatim
-
J
The entire creative world should get behind Alex Scheffler and start a class action lawsuit against AI firms that are extracting our visual culture. We need a landmark case to put the brakes on.
-
I try to avoid using AI as much as possible. I'm at uni at the moment and two of my lecturers have set courseworks where I have to use it. The first I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to. He asked us to use it to create a document and then assess it, I hope with the idea of showing us how bad it was. The second, though? We had to use some form of…
-
B
# BBC # News # Entertainment # Arts Gruffalo illustrator considering legal action against AI firms
-
I assumed the idea was that AI slop would drown out the signal so that you'd literally be unable to find the better human art. In that case you'd need a reviewer or news site to direct you to good shows/movies/books. Like this subreddit for example if this sub isn't just a bot house these days. I don't know just how that person meant it. I don't…
-
While I don't/wouldn't personally have a problem with my artwork being absorbed into "the collective" of a system sampling and and using characteristics of my work, people have told me that it's affecting their commissions, sales, etc. and I completely understand. I have had to change a lot about my own career to prepare for AI having a bigger…
-
AI is not "an artist imitating a style", it is a computer program that sucked up all the style to spit it out a tiny bit different. This is a corpo with a plagiarism tool, not an actual artist with a trained style. Also, if you can recognize someone's style, I think this argument falls flat. Even look alike artists don't draw the EXACT same, and…
-
Sorry to hear you're so deluded to think that. I actually happen to be extremely well educated in how ai actually works. And it's got some amount of potential for real application. Or rather the concept of learning algorithms and similar do. But what we currently call ai really doesn't. But sure whatever I'm glad you can mill out slop more…
-
Except he likely wouldn’t have made bank off his books for 30 years without the protection afforded by copyright. Without that legal protection, publishers could have put out knock-offs as soon as he tried to put anything out, eating into his earnings. Sure, some people would still make a living despite that, but it’s not like artists are known…
-
??? Teachers and administrators are working like crazy to keep students from using AI to cheat and write papers. Tons of teachers I know have completely revamped their courses and things like essays are now required to be hand written or done in class. And if someone does use AI, there are severe consequences. The Dartmouth provost was just forced…
-
The Gruffalo angle is what makes this one feel different to me — Scheffler's style basically is the brand, and any kid could spot it from across a room. An AI image in that style isn't really 'inspired by' his work, it's just the character with the serial numbers filed off. If anyone has the standing to draw a line here, it's him.
-
Not overly, especially when you can just organize a 10 minutes meeting with the individual and discuss the topic, it pretty quickly highlights anyone that has no actual understanding and who relied on LLM's.
-
A human imitating someone else's art style doesn't necessarily imply that that person acquired the original work illegally in order to learn how to do that. With an AI, it does necessarily imply that.
-
Yes. Having terms about what people are and are not allowed to do with your IP is a standard part of copyright law. Having terms about who is and is not allowed to read the book isn't.
-
They're almost certainly not "hiring" anyone. And even if they are silly enough to PAY for AI slop, they're still paying for stolen material because all AI output is based on theft.
-
Do they? Seems to me that pretty much any sort of writing or art produced by AI qualifies as slop, and plenty of them seem to love that stuff in at least some contexts.
-
how convenient to claim to be "anti-ai" but still come out swinging versus people who are actually anti-ai "ai is bad but anti-ai people are mean and that's worse :("
-
But you cannot trademark an art style. Someone can theoretically draw just like him. They should be allowed to and they should be allowed to be hired and paid for it.
-
The Highway Rat, grew horribly fat, from eating up everyone's dinner That book lives rent free in my head, both my boys loved it
-
No, it's just slop. You can try to equivocate all you want, but all AI output is slop by definition.
-
it's funny how you have to shift goalposts so that your point sounds even mildly not insane
-
That's literally not how AI training works. Original data isn't part of the model.
All 1 developments of Gruffalo illustrator Scheffler weighs legal action against… →
Google NewsNewswiresMastodonRedditBluesky