@STD said in AI PBs:
You are paying for everything being above board. If the corporation is pulling funny business, then that’s on them (and Disney’s lawyers will undoubtedly made them pay).
That’s just not accurate. Tools like Midjourney provide absolutely no claims that they have the rights to the materials used in their training data or that the images they generate are safe from copyright or trademark infringement claims. Mainly because they don’t. That’s why there are eleventy billion lawsuits against GenAI companies from artists, authors, publishers, and more.
And EVEN IF the law concludes that training these GenAI systems on copyrighted material is fair use (which is still very much up in the air), that still doesn’t protect you if something you generate with them infringes on someone else’s copyrights or trademarks.
I can ask GenAI to make me an image of a golden space robot and slap it on a T-Shirt to sell, but that’s not going to save me from a DMCA takedown or lawsuit once Disney sees that it’s the spitting image of C-3PO.
@Third-Eye said in AI PBs:
Anyway, if this was going to go anywhere in terms of litigation it would’ve come up in the 2000s when fan fiction and websites that did ‘dream casting’ for movies were just becoming things.
That’s what I was alluding to when I mentioned fancasts/faceclaims not being unique to MUSHes. Like fanfic/fanart, there are certainly those who take issue with them. And like fanfic/fanart, they exist on shaky copyright ground, relying mainly on the good graces of the creators.
Even so, there never has been anywhere near the widespread outcry from creatives over these things than there has with GenAI. If you have a personal problem with them, that’s totally fine! But thinking that GenAI is better than fancasting because it somehow harms creatives less feels like it’s almost willfully ignoring what creatives themselves are saying.