Freedom to use AI-generated content was always a potential outcome. Nothing has been set in stone, but it seems that as long as you infringe on enough copyrighted works, you can argue that no direct connection can be made to the source work and therefore the result is legally distinct.
If this trend will continue, this will be the end of the open internet. Expect login walls and subscriptions everywhere. Expect all internet art to become heavily watermarked, or conclusions or high-quality versions to be stuck behind micropayments or subscriptions. Also expect more DRM on anything digital, because pirated content is essentially allowed for training data sets and strong encryption and strict DRM will be the only way to keep such content from being used as training data.
AI is nice and all, but things are going to become a lot worse before they get better.
this will be the end of the open internet. Expect login walls and subscriptions everywhere.
Rising interest rates are doing that, not AI.
The open Internet is based on a fundamental principal that people like you forget over and over.
Information should be free and plentiful, and making it free and plentiful benefits the common person. Data and scraping are essential parts of that common good.
The Internet will survive. The one you think exists - where you get to mooch and demand payment - never existed.
The internet where people make information free and for the benefits of the common good died a long time ago. The internet of today is siloed and controlled by huge corporations.
The small fediverse contingent will survive, but we’re a tiny and insignificant speck of maybe a couple million accounts in an internet of billions, and even the fediverse is full of reposts from other websites. Everything else will get worse.
The few companies with the hundreds of millions of fuck-you money to train an AI will gain more control while also locking down access to their content. Anything remotely like bots (i.e. Linux users, Firefox users) will probably get blocked harder than someone trying to access a Cloudflare website over Tor. Any website producing content that can be bought, will be bought, and locked behind DRM and/or paywalls.
The internet where people make information free and for the benefits of the common good died a long time ago.
It’s very much alive and kicking.
All of the “silos” literally depend on it continuing to happen and exist only by nature of the fact that they’re still open and easily browsed by individuals. If Reddit turns off access to the average person, Reddit eventually disappears.
Notably, you can still get to Twitter though nitter.
You can still get to Reddit through various open source front ends.
You can still get to YouTube through newpipe.
You may not remember this, but there have been many attempts to silo the Internet. It always falls as the company that does so stagnates and users eventually abandon ship.
The few companies with the hundreds of millions of fuck-you money to train an AI will gain more control while also locking down access to their content.
And you want to give them the monetary incentive and make this future literally inevitable by locking data out of the hands of anyone who can’t pay.
Copyright is, at its heart, about the right to make copies. If no direct connection can be made to another work then it is clearly not a copy and therefore…
Your fears don’t seem plausible, either. A person or company doing AI training only needs 1 single copy. It’s hard to see how that would translate to more than a few extra copies sold; at best, maybe a few dozen or a few hundred in the long run. I can see how going to court over a single copy of each item in their catalog is worth it for the larger corporations but what you fear just doesn’t make financial sense to me.
Most news is still free. Paywalls are easily bypassed by archive websites, and that’s not because news websites don’t know that this is possible. Youtube is usable through Invidious and yt-dlp and what have you, not because Youtube can’t detect you using an alternative frontend, but because there’s no benefit in spending effort to prevent those methods because no significant amount of users use that stuff.
With companies free to take other people’s work without attribution or payment, companies owning content will lose their competitive advantage if their competitors sell better data sets, models, and generic data as a whole.
If you think things are bad now, wait until companies actually start caring about content being ripped. We’ve already seen this (remember the Reddit meltdown?), Youtube seems to be following in Reddit’s footsteps, and the rest will follow.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Google’s remote attestation tech will find its way back into browsers in a couple of years.
Corporations have been trying to control more and more of what users do and how they do it for longer than AI has been a “threat”. I wouldn’t say AI changes anything. At most, maybe, it might accelerate things a little. But if I had to guess, the corpos are already moving as fast as they can with locking everything down for the benefit of no one, but them.
Freedom to use AI-generated content was always a potential outcome. Nothing has been set in stone, but it seems that as long as you infringe on enough copyrighted works, you can argue that no direct connection can be made to the source work and therefore the result is legally distinct.
If this trend will continue, this will be the end of the open internet. Expect login walls and subscriptions everywhere. Expect all internet art to become heavily watermarked, or conclusions or high-quality versions to be stuck behind micropayments or subscriptions. Also expect more DRM on anything digital, because pirated content is essentially allowed for training data sets and strong encryption and strict DRM will be the only way to keep such content from being used as training data.
AI is nice and all, but things are going to become a lot worse before they get better.
Rising interest rates are doing that, not AI.
The open Internet is based on a fundamental principal that people like you forget over and over.
Information should be free and plentiful, and making it free and plentiful benefits the common person. Data and scraping are essential parts of that common good.
The Internet will survive. The one you think exists - where you get to mooch and demand payment - never existed.
The internet where people make information free and for the benefits of the common good died a long time ago. The internet of today is siloed and controlled by huge corporations.
The small fediverse contingent will survive, but we’re a tiny and insignificant speck of maybe a couple million accounts in an internet of billions, and even the fediverse is full of reposts from other websites. Everything else will get worse.
The few companies with the hundreds of millions of fuck-you money to train an AI will gain more control while also locking down access to their content. Anything remotely like bots (i.e. Linux users, Firefox users) will probably get blocked harder than someone trying to access a Cloudflare website over Tor. Any website producing content that can be bought, will be bought, and locked behind DRM and/or paywalls.
It’s very much alive and kicking.
All of the “silos” literally depend on it continuing to happen and exist only by nature of the fact that they’re still open and easily browsed by individuals. If Reddit turns off access to the average person, Reddit eventually disappears.
Notably, you can still get to Twitter though nitter.
You can still get to Reddit through various open source front ends.
You can still get to YouTube through newpipe.
You may not remember this, but there have been many attempts to silo the Internet. It always falls as the company that does so stagnates and users eventually abandon ship.
And you want to give them the monetary incentive and make this future literally inevitable by locking data out of the hands of anyone who can’t pay.
Copyright is, at its heart, about the right to make copies. If no direct connection can be made to another work then it is clearly not a copy and therefore…
Your fears don’t seem plausible, either. A person or company doing AI training only needs 1 single copy. It’s hard to see how that would translate to more than a few extra copies sold; at best, maybe a few dozen or a few hundred in the long run. I can see how going to court over a single copy of each item in their catalog is worth it for the larger corporations but what you fear just doesn’t make financial sense to me.
deleted by creator
So… You say nothing will change.
Most news is still free. Paywalls are easily bypassed by archive websites, and that’s not because news websites don’t know that this is possible. Youtube is usable through Invidious and yt-dlp and what have you, not because Youtube can’t detect you using an alternative frontend, but because there’s no benefit in spending effort to prevent those methods because no significant amount of users use that stuff.
With companies free to take other people’s work without attribution or payment, companies owning content will lose their competitive advantage if their competitors sell better data sets, models, and generic data as a whole.
If you think things are bad now, wait until companies actually start caring about content being ripped. We’ve already seen this (remember the Reddit meltdown?), Youtube seems to be following in Reddit’s footsteps, and the rest will follow.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Google’s remote attestation tech will find its way back into browsers in a couple of years.
Corporations have been trying to control more and more of what users do and how they do it for longer than AI has been a “threat”. I wouldn’t say AI changes anything. At most, maybe, it might accelerate things a little. But if I had to guess, the corpos are already moving as fast as they can with locking everything down for the benefit of no one, but them.
They’re saying it is not infringement at all so your statement is simply incorrect.
This is the correct ruling based on how ml works.