Taggart :donor: (@mttaggart)
infosec.town
Japan determines copyright doesn't apply to LLM/ML training data. > On a global scale, Japan’s move adds a twist to the regulation debate. Current discussions have focused on a “rogue nation” scenario where a less developed country might disregard a global framework to gain an advantage. But with Japan, we see a different dynamic. The world’s third-largest economy is saying it won’t hinder AI research and development. Plus, it’s prepared to leverage this new technology to compete directly with the West. I am going to live in the sea. https://www.biia.com/japan-goes-all-in-copyright-doesnt-apply-to-ai-training/

cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/8121669

Taggart (@mttaggart) writes:

Japan determines copyright doesn’t apply to LLM/ML training data.

On a global scale, Japan’s move adds a twist to the regulation debate. Current discussions have focused on a “rogue nation” scenario where a less developed country might disregard a global framework to gain an advantage. But with Japan, we see a different dynamic. The world’s third-largest economy is saying it won’t hinder AI research and development. Plus, it’s prepared to leverage this new technology to compete directly with the West.

I am going to live in the sea.

www.biia.com/japan-goes-all-in-copyright-doesnt-apply-to-ai-training/

  • friend_of_satan@lemmy.worldEnglish
    255·
    10 months ago

    What’s stopping somebody from making an LLM that can reproduce media that was used in its training with close to 100% accuracy? If that happens, then we’ll have a copyright laundering service.

    • DogWater@lemmy.worldEnglish
      26·
      10 months ago

      Reproducing copywrited works would be a problem. Consuming them is not.

      In your example, a copyright case would be able to move forward and be tested in court. I would think it stands as good of a shot at prevailing in that example. It would be the same as a case against someone who wrote a script for a website to reproduce copyrighted work on command. The difference is this isn’t that. And if and when it does that, the ai can be tuned to prevent it from continuing to do it.

    • regbin_@lemmy.worldEnglish
      14·
      10 months ago

      If you make it reproduce copyrighted media, it is a problem.

      As long as the stuff it generates doesn’t resemble any copyrighted works, even if it was trained on copyrighted works, I don’t see why that should be problem.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        10 months ago

        I don’t even think there’s a problem recreating it, you just can’t distribute it.

        For personal use it’s fine.

        Its not like Disney is suing everyone drawing micky mouse in their personal art workbook

    • Kepabar@startrek.websiteEnglish
      132·
      10 months ago

      What media is an LLM going to be able to reproduce that I can’t already reproduce with a copy paste?

      • Pirasp@lemmy.worldEnglish
        215·
        10 months ago

        That’s not the point. If you rip a dvd, you babe the movie, but you can’t sell DVDs with the movie, because it is copyrighted. After the “AI” has recreated it, the copyright is gone, so you can sell that version with impunity.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      10 months ago

      It will go to a judge and the judge will say that changing three pixels doesn’t make it derivative. Regardless of the method of transformation, the same fair use and parody laws apply.