this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
112 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37705 readers
99 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] millie@beehaw.org 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Whether or not you want someone to use your likeness isn't necessarily just a matter of money. You can't just wave dollar bills at any objection and assume everything's going to be okay. Some things are more important than a few bucks.

[–] PoisonedPrisonPanda@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sure. I fully agree with you.

But nonetheless its how technology works. Make something accessible to everyone (at least in digital technology)

Lets compare it to how davinci would have though about the possibility of photocopying the mona lisa and bring the art into every household.

Making him more fameous more than he could ever be by simply having one original picture in the louvre.

I think this example can be done with any abritrary skill and digital modelling.

Lets think ahead. A tennis player and his movements are used to train and create a robot which acts as a tennis teacher for tennis amateurs. It would also benefit the sport in general.

[–] millie@beehaw.org 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I mean, in the instance of legal use of a likeness outside of maybe some fair use cases, the technology doesn't necessarily dictate that its own use is legitimate in all use cases. Some people independently training a model for private use may be harder or impossible to do anything about, but there's definitely precedent for going after someone for profiting from your likeness without your consent.

There may be some grounds where the sort of fair use that parody enjoys could apply to AI or the use of AI-derived likenesses, but I wouldn't expect people's rights to their own likeness to evaporate overnight unless copyright goes with them in some broader sense.

The current controversy within SAG over whether to sign even a deal on a per-project basis for scanning actors seems like a pretty good indicator that the standards on this are far from ironed out.

When it comes to training models, I do think it's unrealistic to limit the use of materials that are readily and legitimately available on the internet for free. But straight up using AI to copy a likeness for profit is very different.