Jump to content

richardmurray

Boycott Amazon
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,381

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    90

 Content Type 

Blog Comments posted by richardmurray

  4. richardmurray

    Posted

    A extended essay on ownership

     

    https://www.deviantart.com/theonewithbear/journal/Copyright-and-fair-use-A-deeper-look-into-AI-937264127

     

    CONTENT

     

    Hello everyone,

    as the discussion on AI grows and attitudes become ever so polarizing on the subject, I decided I should elaborate and share facts on the law, as it is currently standing. Before I start, disclaimer:

    I'm not with nor against AI. I'm only interested in exploring the foundation of which a discussion is built upon.

    I believe it is important for any artist and freelancer to understand law, as it is a key in protecting ourselves. Fear and anger can do very little if the source of it isn't factual.

    Everything I write is based on my own research, readings, understanding and worded in my own ways. If I am wrong logistically, please feel 100% free to correct me, I won't be offended.

    This is written as of November 15, 2022. If the law gets updated, I will either update this journal with correct time and information or remove it entirely to avoid confusion.

    This is based on the US law (which is hilarious because I'm Canadian) and may defer from other country's law.

    FAIR USE

    "AI art", as it currently stands in law, is NOT illegal. It may not feel legal, but it is not illegal. This is due to the counter law to copyright: fair use.

    Fair use isn't just a term tech-bros use to defend AI's existence, it is something we, as creatives, have long benefitted from.

    Copyright protects the unique expression of an idea. Fair use protects unlicensed usage of copyrighted materials.

    Fair use allows creatives to make fanart (note: not sell), write fanfics, review video games, make parodies, write movie essays etc. to an extent without obtaining permission from the copyright owners. It is a law that exist to expand freedom of creativity in transformative nature.

     

    Fair use of copyright law (Section 107) calls for 4 factors:

    Purpose - commercial or nonprofit educational

    Nature of copyrighted work - creative or technical

    Amount of portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole

    Effect of use upon the potential market

     

    Copyright and fair use conflicts go far into the history, see cases: Summaries of Fair Use Cases

    A Tale of Two Seusses and Argued Fair Uses: The Fact-Specific Nature of Copyright Fair Use

    Cariou v. Prince — Artist Rights

    Banksy loses trademark battle after claiming ‘copyright is for losers’

    Top 10 Cases on Appropriation Art and the Law

     

    I could go on, but I think you get the idea.

     

    As the verdict on whether or not machine learning should motivate an update on copyright law is still up in the air, currently, whether you like it or not, scraping the internet for AI training purpose and putting it to use still falls under fair use protection.

    Source: U.S. Copyright Office. Click on Videos to listen to the panels that took place in 2021

    Source: Pondering AI Machine Learning and Copyright Fair Use

    "Protected" doesn't mean the court will rule in its favor, because it still depends on -how- it's used. As mentioned, fair use calls for 4 factors. To elaborate on each and use AI as an example (please be mindful that ALL of these scenarios are just possibilities, not absolute and can get really grey when used in combinations. I'm not a lawyer, I won't argue your case):

    MAY be protected by fair use:

    - the AI art piece isn't financially profiting

    - the AI art piece is generated with generic prompts and ideas

    - if the case is argued from the perspective where AI is built on billions of images, combined with personal photos, prompts, references and the result is transformative compared to the images used.

    MAY NOT be protected by fair use:

    - the AI art piece is profiting

    - is using specific artist's name/brand (note: NOT the art itself. More on this below) *

    - if argued from the perspective that it is built entirely off of copyrighted work and cannot exist without

    Additionally, the court may consider:

    - has the AI piece in question caused loss in revenue for the copyrighted work?

    - will the AI piece cause future harm in revenue for the copyrighted work? (Note: for the above 2 points to stand, generally, the copyright holder must prove that the market had the intention to pay the copyright holder prior to the market discovering the AI art piece)

    - is the piece "transformative" enough, meaning if the outcome resembles or reminds you or the copyrighted work, and/or has enough content and personal touch and ideas added to it to separate it from the copyrighted work, making it something new? If so, fair use. If not, copyright infringement.

    *Artist's name/brand:

    The reason I separated this into its own tab is because, names and brands don't fall under copyright, but rather trademark law. Copyright protects the unique expression of an idea, in our case, the visual representation of an idea. Styles, compositions, poses, color palettes, subject matter cannot be copyrighted as separate categories, but a unique combination of these categories done in specific ways can be copyrighted. IE: "girl in a black suit" can't be copyrighted, "a girl with red hair, mostly tied up, wearing black suit with yellow glowy eyes named Makina" can be copyrighted.

    Due to the transformative nature of an AI generated piece, the final product will bond to look different than the copyrighted materials. This may put AI art under fair use or give it bigger argument ground.

    However, if an artist's name is used as a prompt and the artist's name is trademarked, the case could go beyond just visual representation and fall out of fair use. Unlike copyright, which is automatic (though can be registered for certificate), in order to be protected by trademark law, you have to register for it.

     

    Further reading on trademark law and copyright: Copyright in Characters: What Can I Use? Trademark vs. Copyright: Which Do You Need for Your Business?

    Conclusion: It depends on how good your lawyer is. That's all there is to it.

    MISCONCEPTION

    "AI art can't be copyrighted because it infringes on copyright and is illegal" is a FALSE statement. The U.S. law dictates that machine cannot copyright its art, same as animals, plants and nature. If a monkey shits on a banana, the monkey cannot copyright the shit on banana. The machine cannot copyright the awkward looking cow it just generated with 5 words.

    The same does not apply to the human that uses the machine.

    On September 15th, 2022, Kris Kashtanova successfully copyrighted their Midjouney generated comic book, Zarya of the Dawn. The approval came from having presented credible creative process. Artist receives first known US copyright registration for latent diffusion AI art

    It is still early to say what this may mean for copyright law down the road, but it defeats the statement which AI art can't be copyrighted.

     

    On the other side of this coin, Microsoft, GitHUB and OpenAI are being sued for allegedly violating copyright law. The lawsuit against Microsoft, GitHub and OpenAI that could change the rules of AI copyright

    When giants are involved, landscapes shift. The verdict of this trial may be the one we should pay attention to.

    ETHICS

    Now we get into the muddiest area of it all, ethics. To be quite honest, I don't know how to discuss this area as it isn't logical and mostly emotional. Everyone on the internet is more ethical than the last moron. Everyone judges just one step below what they find acceptable.

    The bar of ethics varies vastly from one person to the next, but let's simply compare actions.

    I personally believe it is very difficult for the art community to talk ethics, as a very big portion of us thrive on fanart.

    Without fair use, 99% of the time, fanart is a breach on copyright as you've never obtained permission from the copyright holder to create a piece, so we benefit from fair use.

    Many of us don't just create fanart, we also sell them, which often is no longer protected by fair use and becomes copyright infringement.

    Many artists not only sell them, but also try evading copyright claims on Etsy, AFTER copyright claims were filed.

    I've heard many try to defend this by claiming that at least artists have put in the effort to improve craft compared to someone who just types in a few key words. In this argument, you're mixing the positions of victim and offender.

    The relationship is like this:

    AI Art - Artist (victim) vs. Tech bros (offender)

    Fanart - IP owners (victim) vs. Artist (offender)

     

    The IP owners have invested millions of dollars, years of effort, and hard work from not just one artist, but teams of people with various skillsets to create memorable characters and stories, just so an artist who has drawn for a few years can profit off of it.

     

    You may argue that the fanart you create and sell does not hurt the IP, which may very well be true. I never have any shame selling fanart of Danganronpa because 1. people who buy them already own the games and 2. I sold more copies of the games because people were curious about what I was painting and I speak highly of the games.

    However, me being able to justify my action in my head does not make it legal.

    As opposed to machine learning, which has no specific law currently to regulate it, I'm ALREADY breaking the law (plz don't report me to police kthx).

    So who am I to talk ethics?

     

    To me, humans are all the same. If it benefits us, we find ways to justify and welcome it. If it hurts our benefit, we try to burn it to the ground.

     

    A portion of the ethic problem with AI is also just context, attitude and usage.

    If a tech bro uses AI and acts like they are an artist who can do better than you, AI can go to hell.

    If a concept artist uses AI to speed up work in a production pipeline, AI is a useful tool.

    CONCLUSION

    The reason I wrote this journal is not to tell you what is right or wrong. This is not me telling you we should embrace AI with open arms or dump it down the drain. I just wish for people to be more informed on the current state of law, because so much of the anger is based on misconception and that doesn't help our case.

    Whether you have given consent or not at this point for machine learning doesn't matter, because there's no law to specifically target machine learning. If there is no law targeting it, then the current state of copyright law and fair use apply. You are aiming the pitchfork and torches at the wrong people.

     

    There may be very little we can do at the moment, however, please don't despair.

    Please don't forget the fundamental reason of why creatives are needed in this world and why we create. Tech bros may tell you that ideas matter more than skill, but they fail to recognize that they don't have brilliant ideas. They are just as basic and mediocre as they were before without AI. This is why we are only a few months in, and they have already saturated their own market, gotten bored because they realize it's hard to make a real profit.

    They can't come up with newer prompts and they can't look any different from each other.

     

    But the creatives will live on. We have the ability to be inspired and to build upon. It is in our blood and soul and AI can't take that away from us. If the millions of better artists out there never stopped us from wanting to improve and carve out our own space in this world, why should AI?

     

    There are many people I've spoken with that always wanted to draw. They used AI, it gave them the sweet taste of the ability to visualize their ideas, and now they want more. They want to draw. And that's wonderful. There are also many artists doing incredible things with AI and taking their creativity to the next level due to AI opening a sky beyond their limitations.

     

    Ultimately, we thrive on the little strokes we lay on the canvas; live for the fucking hot people we create. We have stories to tell, emotions to convey, feet anatomy to struggle with, and we know the satisfaction of watching our piece come together. We will shine through because artists are strong people, and we will find a way to co-exist.

  15. KENNETH

    Posted

    hahaha @KENNETH:) yeah, a new virginia senator is a black woman. She is pro schtrumpf, anti abortion, a bootstrapper in fiscal views. She is a DOSer of the caribbean , not the usa. I listened to what she had to say and she nothing about policy so... she wants black people to become POALs but, she offers nothing policy wise. She doesn't deny negative bias, but she offers no solutions outside individualism

  17. KENNETH

    Posted

    I think one thing that will help everyone is to disassociate terms like liberal or conservative or democrat or republican to parties of governance. The POAJ or POAL , PArty of Andrew JAckson  or Party of Abraham Lincoln are none of those terms. NEither is liberal or conservative or democrat or republican. Both are parties of government, trying to get votes, by any means necessary. IF we all stop looking at parties of governance as philosophical havens it will make it easier to relate to their actions. TO your issue of phenotypical race. The POAL knows that you can get votes by saying "blacks bad" so they do and they win those place. 

  18. KENNETH

    Posted

    good points, the usa's fiscal environment, from the destruction of most indigenous peoples to the enslavement of blacks, no matter their ancestral descendency, was communal in nature. It wasn't each indigenous must be killed or each black is enslaved, it was all indigenous must be kileld  or all blacks  are enslaved. The fiscal reality is in contrast to the declaration or constitutions legal framework, which emphasizes individual rights over any collective. For whites who had and have the positive fruits of both the fiscal communalism or the legal individualism, it has brought about a modern white community that is in itself very multiracial. But, for communities of differing descent<indigenous> or phenotype<black> the fiscal disadvantage and the legal misapplication they received and received creates a terrible environment for the 2022 usa to be a happy rainbow

    • Like 1
  19. richardmurray

    Posted

    I really love this post, the truth in it is stunning

     

    The truth in the following article about Nintendo's early days is something that saddens me deeply, to read now. I said many of these things absent the ability to cite and people in the usa, in majority would and will refute. Glad to have finally found evidence to show the statian populace in terms of the history of video games.

  21. richardmurray

    Posted

    My opinion as I read the essay
     
    Well modern media has created a pathway for individuals of the people, the polis, to relate to all, to create a rigid framework of morals, or rules or ethics, to anything. The article suggest correctly modern politicization isn't about governing or government, a thing that governs; it is about people making things of themselves, political.
    The author makes one mistake, the politics of ethics is not complicated to comprehend if you accept that ethics do not have a universally accepted form. Once you comprehend ethics are defined by each individual or group, then ethics by default is a subset of politics. Aesthetics , meaning what is perceived, is also a subset of politics.
    The author hits on the head, albeit with a geographic absence, when they describe the truth; modern humanity in the places where the internet is available, which is still not most humanity actually, , the readership is groomed by its communication to itself to have a very selfish sense of character. In an international communication hub, the people in it are learning to be more individual, not more communal, or tribal not integrated.
     
    I enjoyed this prose from the essay in brackets
    <Emma Cline’s The Girls, a gem of a sanctimony novel, is full of such shards: “Mothers glancing around for their children, moved by some feeling they couldn’t name. Women reaching for their boyfriend’s hands.” >
     
    I Quote the essay again in brackets
    <Later, Frances the communist avows that she “want[s] to destroy capitalism and consider[s] masculinity personally oppressive.” >
    That line to be fair proves the authors point. Anyone who has drifted online to the bright or loud places, if they dare read the comments, knows many people recite that thinking in so many words.
     
    I will not spoil the essay, but if you get to the point where Ligaya Mishan is quoted and you read a Dance of Dragons then think Shame^INF and then Cerci's smile in the arms of the mountain made some sort of zombie thing.
     
    The author of the article missed a chance to relate the history of self flagellation in the counter-reformation in Europe. Self-flagellation is a strong cultural element in European and by extension, European imperial culture. From baptisms that nearly or sometimes drown throughout the christian communities, to the remnant of impatience to black children in black parenting stemming from a time when black people were the auto child to whites, to the strength of arranged marriage among people who are labeled: educated, wealthy, modern, throughout latin america or asia <even though one's knowledge, finances,time of birth, or culture does not deny them the willingness to suffer in a marriage they didn't want> . So, the self cancellation is merely a current form of self flagellation.
     
    The nathan Goldman quote made me laugh. But I disagree with the word Juvenile being used by the author. Children have fought wars. Some children have a complexity of life that will make larvae out of the supposed mature intelligentsia. I don't think the issue is age, but scope. Simplicity is the goal, simplicity with a language of adult tweets woven tight around the face.
     
    His point on paradise lost is well done. To be blunt, I think an enlightening or at least exposing panel will be with many writers today discussing that book and its unapologetic glory for "a bad man"
     
    Reading the paragraphs concerning the need of the human individual to be present in fiction , for fiction to be valuable made me think of FLannery O'Connor whose work, by default is the opposite. I argue that the characters in her work, ask the writers or readership the author refer to face the magic mirror gate in Die unendliche Geschichte; most of them clearly running away screaming!, forgive me.
     
    The study of human communalism is not all that is written. I paraphrased the quote the author used of baldwin. I concur with the writer, the question of what if is interesting in literature. If what if does not exist but only of course exists in literature, then literature becomes purely commercial, like glowing vampires in the bright sunlight who have nothing to fear.
     
    I am reading Nella larsen but I can suggest, Alice Dunbar Nelson. In a number of her works, you gather the voice of the multiracial world in the black community in the usa, which is rarely emitted in most financed media.
     
    I recall reading that essay from Viet Than Nguyen , I thought and think him wrong, even on a monday. I like this line: In a better literature than the sanctimonists’, the frequent distance between our ideals and our practices would itself be the subject of interesting novels.
    I amend that novels where characters lives show the variance between how we want to act while how we act returns to the earlier point about being human. The author is being a little verbose.
     
    The author continues on restating points. He isn't preaching Trilling on a pulpit but he is now using more words to restate what he already described, the frustration is coming out.
    I comprehend the author's frustration. No one has quoted Richard Murray yet, to RIchard Murray's knowledge at least, but I recall asking questions in a writing group, and being excommunicado-ed for it. The questions, the what if, ask not only the readers but other writers to see where they may be uncomfortable. Writers , reared in modernity, not only want to covet the tribal audience but are in the coven of tribalist. And, it has created rifts in the literary creators community, which is not uncommon in history, but evident in the literature of a day.
     
    ...
    What say you?
     
    Article from the author
     
     
  22. richardmurray

    Posted

    The title plus subtitle in the article, the following prose concern, linked below make an assertion or ask a question.  The assertion is: Men do not read enough erotica literature while erotica literature is more mentally stimulating. The question is: Why are men so impotent in bed or rigid out of bed? 

    The first five paragraphs simply assert that the relationship men have to erotic literature is the mind of most humans is myth, not reality and some quotations are given. The next two paragraphs reassert an opinion: erotic literature is better to stew the imagination than video pornography, and pornhub is mentioned. The next five paragraphs attempt to ask a question: what is erotica for men; said paragraphs do not answer the question, but suggest that erotica is genderless in the audience desires of its writers/creators. The next four paragraphs discuss ethics in erotica. The point said paragraphs come to is erotic literature like video porn will challenge some rules from some humans on what is good to experience. But, unlike video porn, no real humans are involved in the acts that only the creations of the oneroi do in your mind. To put it bluntly, in a legal way, your thoughts can be disliked but they can not be deemed criminal. The next six paragraphs offer citations or referrals to erotic literature, to aid the reader to convince themselves or others to read more erotica.

    The article does not state the erotic literature men are reading, nor does it suggest why men need to read more erotica. The article doesn't provide any statistics to suggest erotic literature reading is more mentally stimulating than viewing video porn. The article doesn't suggest through statistics or in situation potential how men can become more potent in bed or flexible in all ways throughout humanity while reading erotica. 

     

    But, one must always look toward themselves. So,I ask myself the following questions.

    1. Do I like reading erotica?

    2. Do I know many men who read erotica?

    3. Has erotic literature, I read, made me more stimulated mentally?

    4. Through other men I know personally, why are men impotent in bed or rigid out of bed, relating to reading?

    5. What is the relationship of men to erotic literature?

    6. Does erotic literature stew imagination better than video porn?

    7. What is erotica for men?

    8. What are the ethics to Erotica?

     

    The following paragraph answers questions 1/2/5/7

    I remember, being a boy who wrote poetry mostly, going to various book fairs in a place in manhattan in new york city, where I was raised. Said place is Harlem. In said book fairs, I recall tables for, what I will call, Black Urban Romance. I recall a cover now. A black man, shirtless of course, having an angry face filled the cover. The head of a black woman was placed under his crotch or between his legs. The cover was above his chest: "Ass is ready 2". I moved on as a child. As a teenager, I laughed and moved on. As a grown man, I skipped that section of the fair. I only disliked the hospital section from said fairs more, with all the pamphlets of possible illness or pain that I need to consider for every moment of my life. ... What is erotica for men or anyone is a vital question. I remember an xmen comic book, yes give me a moment, where an advertisement for an xmen swimsuit calendar was in the middle of the comic book. No, I didn't buy an xmen swimsuit calendar. But, I bet many a boy, immature male legally, or man, mature male legally, were stimulated by the truly fantastical drawn physiques of the xmen women in the skimpiest swimsuits. Does this mean erotic literature for men need to refer to the visual gratifications in visual porn? No, but I am certain most men, definitively this man, are not aroused by the figures of men usually present in erotic literature imagery. And, sadly purists, the modern readership is highly convinced by book covers. Do I like reading the "Ass is Ready" series? No, I never even tried. But, I am certain most men I know, who like to read, evaded erotic literature based on how it is sold. Now, I have no statistics. Maybe men in the lgb~ community like to read books in the erotic literature zone. If the article was insinuating influence from men in said community, it did not say and needed to if it based its argument on said community. I find eroticism in other genres or stories, not deemed erotic. No, I will not go into which or what. Erotic literature was said, in the article, not to be made for women or men. But, if more men are to be attracted to erotic literature it has to appeal to the width of men's lust, which can challenge various ethical structures, especially from women.

    The following paragraph answers questions 3/4/6/8 

    What is ethics? Ethics are rules of interaction defined by humans. Even though, historically, many humans, individually or collectively, love to attribute a set of ethics as elemental or timeless. The truth is no set of ethics is ever timeless or elemental. Why does that matter? The question of erotic literature's value as more mentally stimulating <automatically accepted in the article> or the effect of any art on human beings as better<like children listening to european orchestral music made between the 1400s to early 1900s is better for their mental growth> or the role of what a person or group shall want in their arts defining class/rank/race <the visual rawness of video porn being touted as beneath the literary complexity in erotic literature, mentioned in the article > are all ethics. These are not truths. These are rules. The article presents these rules as what need to be. But, that is not elemental. That is not undeniable. That is opinion. In certain places in humanity, majority opinion. But, majority opinion has never equaled better. Majority opinion dictates the pressure on any minority or individual on how to act. While I chided the "Ass is ready" series with my own set of ethics. In no way was I correct or right. For the record, Black Urban Fiction is the biggest money maker from Black book buying dollars involving literature publicly designed toward the black community, in the united states of america at least. Men through rearing or personal taste, like the raw or raunchy lust form of erotica. Does that mean men are less flexible in their literary taste? Some men are being less flexible, maybe even most, with their reading and beyond in other arenas. Not all imaginations want a complex pattern, some want a block color. In the work not labeled erotic literature I read that stimulate me in the way erotic literature is supposed to, I am stimulated in various ways. I do not know if more or less, as I am stimulated mentally in various ways from many forms of literature. But the ethics around erotica, whether literary or video or graphic, need to have a space for the width of erotica that is desired from men, or women.  

     

    But making any ethical code that wide will require a big imagination. 

     

    https://www.insidehook.com/article/sex-and-dating/time-men-start-reading-more-erotica

×
×
  • Create New...