View Single Post
Old 10-21-2024, 12:44 PM   #5
DiapDealer
Grand Sorcerer
DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
DiapDealer's Avatar
 
Posts: 28,674
Karma: 205039118
Join Date: Jan 2010
Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD
I don't think I agree that AI being trained on novels qualifies as IP theft OR plagiarism. I would think the trained algorithms would need to actually produce content that was plagiaristic in nature for it to be such. I don't see much difference (if any) between human writing being influenced by what its authors have read and AI writing being influenced by what human writing it was trained on.

None of which is meant to imply that I'm Ok with AI written content being sold as human written. I just don't believe there's much point in vilifying practices that human writers have utilized for centuries simply because code is doing the same thing. Just like how slapping untested legal theories on the practice probably isn't going to make those novel legal theories stick.

If a human writer was convicted of IP theft, would it be because they produced something that was too similar to another copyrighted work, or because they read 500 books similar to one copyrighted work before they wrote theirs?
DiapDealer is offline   Reply With Quote