158
Calgary liquor store offering support 6-pack for Swifties forced to watch Super Bowl
(calgary.ctvnews.ca)
this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
158 points (97.0% liked)
Not The Onion
12224 readers
1207 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Isn't this illegal? You can't just slap a celebrities image on your product without licensing or permission.
It's a collection of already existing products not a product on it's own, and the image is an AI rendering. It's just a goofy promotion at a single liquor store, like when movie stores do like mystery movie nights and put movies in a brown sack and write something like "for Nicholas Cage lovers" on it. If it is illegal it sure doesn't seem worth enforcing.
Would you mind ai images of you used for commercial use without getting paid? These ads might be implying things about you that are false but make your loved ones worry.
Is that fine or an infringement on the right to your own image?
Oh, won't someone think of the billionaires?!
Fuck this billionaire as well a the rest of them. No one should have that much. Bunch of greedy fucks. She's already parroting Musky about the private jet.
No you fucking numpty, defending the unlicensed use of someones' image or the commercial use of AI art IS DEFENDING RICH PEOPLE, you fucking moron.
Who has access to the AI for commercial use? It's not you or me. It's the billionairs. If you defend not requiring licensing laws to be honored, that HELPS THE PEOPLE WHO CAN STEAL. Who can steal more if you make it legal? You, some numpty on a laptop typing prompts in to Bard? Or the corporations that fucking OWN Bard et. al.??
You are defending something that helps rich shysters, not defending some small shop.
Listen numpty... "Et al." is short for "et alia" which means "and other people". Bard isn't a person. It's a thing. You should have used "etc.", which is short for "et cetera", meaning "and other things".
For something small like this? Sure