Skip to content

“Piracy is Piracy” – Disney and Universal team up to sue Midjourney

Technology
68 40 1.8k
  • I dunno were I stand on this one. I can see Disneys argument and agree with it on first glance, but at the same time, is the artists doing fan art infringing copyright then?

    Artists doing fan art are infringing copyright, yes. If the fan art meets the fair use criteria then they are not Infringing.

    Companies usually overlook the infringement from fan artists because it's free advertising and the public backlash is not worth going after lone artists. They usually will go after fan art of people that profit off it.

  • Artists doing fan art are infringing copyright, yes. If the fan art meets the fair use criteria then they are not Infringing.

    Companies usually overlook the infringement from fan artists because it's free advertising and the public backlash is not worth going after lone artists. They usually will go after fan art of people that profit off it.

    Yes I under that, but is Midjourney profiting off these characters? Ie are people paying for these services just so they can create images of these specific characters ? I think that’s the question that needs to be answered here.

    I mean you’re not paying piecemeal as you would for an artist to create your commission of Shrek getting railed by Donkey, you pay for the service which in turns creates anything you tell it to.

    It’s like I’m still not convinced that training AI with copyrighted material is infringement, because in my mind is not any different than me seeing Arthas when I was kid, thinking he was cool as fuck and then deciding to make my own OC inspired by him. Was I infringing on Blizzard’s copyrighted character for taking inspiration from its design? Was Mike Pondsmith infringing on William Gibson’s copyright when he invented Cyberpunk?

  • requests that Midjourney be made to pay up for the damage it has caused the two companies.

    good luck proving and putting an accurate number to that perceived 'damage'?

    Easy, ten gajillion dollars. Payable in stock.

    • Disney and NBCUniversal have teamed up to sue Midjourney.
    • The companies allege that the platform used its copyright protected material to train its model and that users can generate content that infringes on Disney and Universal’s copyrighted material.
    • The scathing lawsuit requests that Midjourney be made to pay up for the damage it has caused the two companies.

    Removes sunglasses ..."Let them fight"

  • You should totally play the game, but make sure that you pirate it so your money doesn't go to the thief who stole the rights from the creators.

    Would it not then be better to buy a shady key to financially hurt the company?

    • Disney and NBCUniversal have teamed up to sue Midjourney.
    • The companies allege that the platform used its copyright protected material to train its model and that users can generate content that infringes on Disney and Universal’s copyrighted material.
    • The scathing lawsuit requests that Midjourney be made to pay up for the damage it has caused the two companies.

    The worst person you know just made a great point

  • A copy is not theft.

    Intellectual property is thought monopoly. See Disco Elysium for a particularly sad case of it.

    But it would be a copyright infringement.

  • Yes I under that, but is Midjourney profiting off these characters? Ie are people paying for these services just so they can create images of these specific characters ? I think that’s the question that needs to be answered here.

    I mean you’re not paying piecemeal as you would for an artist to create your commission of Shrek getting railed by Donkey, you pay for the service which in turns creates anything you tell it to.

    It’s like I’m still not convinced that training AI with copyrighted material is infringement, because in my mind is not any different than me seeing Arthas when I was kid, thinking he was cool as fuck and then deciding to make my own OC inspired by him. Was I infringing on Blizzard’s copyrighted character for taking inspiration from its design? Was Mike Pondsmith infringing on William Gibson’s copyright when he invented Cyberpunk?

    I mean if you paid for a copy of wc3 to find out about Arthas then no, if you downloaded the game illegally then yes. These companies are often torrenting content just like we would just instead of consuming it directly they’re feeding it to their slop printers to train them. I’m all for piracy, including in this context, but if copyright is a going to be a thing and going to be enforced against individuals pirating treats to consume then it sure as shit should be enforced against the corporations pirating huge amounts of content to train their energy sucking crap factories lol

    • Disney and NBCUniversal have teamed up to sue Midjourney.
    • The companies allege that the platform used its copyright protected material to train its model and that users can generate content that infringes on Disney and Universal’s copyrighted material.
    • The scathing lawsuit requests that Midjourney be made to pay up for the damage it has caused the two companies.

    Too big to fail!

  • I mean if you paid for a copy of wc3 to find out about Arthas then no, if you downloaded the game illegally then yes. These companies are often torrenting content just like we would just instead of consuming it directly they’re feeding it to their slop printers to train them. I’m all for piracy, including in this context, but if copyright is a going to be a thing and going to be enforced against individuals pirating treats to consume then it sure as shit should be enforced against the corporations pirating huge amounts of content to train their energy sucking crap factories lol

    Piracy to me is not the same thing, I’m actually not in favor of piracy, because the way I see it if you want access to a content, and the creator says that you need to pay for that content then you will pay for it. If not then you don’t really want access to it, or you in fact simply did not want to pay for it in which case it’s very similar to stealing. None of the pro piracy arguments convince me, except the ones in which it’s about consuming the content in the format that you want. Ie I buy books from Amazon, but only because I want the writer to get their cut, but I will either remove the DRM off the book or pirate it. So yes if the AI was trained using for example a book whose content is not freely available and ChatGPT simply pirates the content of the book to train their models, then they are in the wrong.

    But here’s the thing about my argument regarding AI training data. I never played Warcraft3 nor World of Warcraft! I only saw the cool art that was displayed on GameStop, online and on shirts on hot topic. I never paid Blizzard for access to Arthas, the design of Arthas was publicly accessible to me by virtue of Blizzard trying to promote their game. So I guess what I’m saying is if the content they trained a model is publicly accessible to people without payment, then there’s no reason AI cannot be trained on it.

    • Disney and NBCUniversal have teamed up to sue Midjourney.
    • The companies allege that the platform used its copyright protected material to train its model and that users can generate content that infringes on Disney and Universal’s copyrighted material.
    • The scathing lawsuit requests that Midjourney be made to pay up for the damage it has caused the two companies.

    I say this as a massive AI critic: Disney does not have a legitimate grievance here.

    AI training data is scraping. Scraping is — and must continue to be — fair use. As Cory Doctorow (fellow AI critic) says: Scraping against the wishes of the scraped is good, actually.

    I want generative AI firms to get taken down. But I want them to be taken down for the right reasons.

    Their products are toxic to communication and collaboration.

    They are the embodiment of a pathology that sees humanity — what they might call inefficiency, disagreement, incoherence, emotionality, bias, chaos, disobedience — as a problem, and technology as the answer.

    Dismantle them on the basis of what their poison does to public discourse, shared knowledge, connection to each other, mental well-being, fair competition, privacy, labor dignity, and personal identity.

    Not because they didn’t pay the fucking Mickey Mouse toll.

  • Piracy to me is not the same thing, I’m actually not in favor of piracy, because the way I see it if you want access to a content, and the creator says that you need to pay for that content then you will pay for it. If not then you don’t really want access to it, or you in fact simply did not want to pay for it in which case it’s very similar to stealing. None of the pro piracy arguments convince me, except the ones in which it’s about consuming the content in the format that you want. Ie I buy books from Amazon, but only because I want the writer to get their cut, but I will either remove the DRM off the book or pirate it. So yes if the AI was trained using for example a book whose content is not freely available and ChatGPT simply pirates the content of the book to train their models, then they are in the wrong.

    But here’s the thing about my argument regarding AI training data. I never played Warcraft3 nor World of Warcraft! I only saw the cool art that was displayed on GameStop, online and on shirts on hot topic. I never paid Blizzard for access to Arthas, the design of Arthas was publicly accessible to me by virtue of Blizzard trying to promote their game. So I guess what I’m saying is if the content they trained a model is publicly accessible to people without payment, then there’s no reason AI cannot be trained on it.

    As far as the ethics of piracy, my stance is that
    The current model where we are essentially paying for someone to hit copy and paste is inherently broken and we need to move to a model based on commissions/grants etc where the artists are being paid to make the works, ideally through public funds.

    As far as the current reality around the AI companies, that Arthas stand was one gamestop had a license to display in their store provided by Blizzard to promote their game. The copyrighted material you “trained on” was provided for piblic access. These companies aren’t training off of publicly available information, as I was saying, they’re torrenting the full copyrighted material in the exact same way a traditional pirate would, The only difference is what they’re doing with it afterwards.

    Edit: I don’t know if there’s evidence of Midjourney’s developers doing it specifically but Meta absolutely has so it’s a pretty safe assumption.

  • As far as the ethics of piracy, my stance is that
    The current model where we are essentially paying for someone to hit copy and paste is inherently broken and we need to move to a model based on commissions/grants etc where the artists are being paid to make the works, ideally through public funds.

    As far as the current reality around the AI companies, that Arthas stand was one gamestop had a license to display in their store provided by Blizzard to promote their game. The copyrighted material you “trained on” was provided for piblic access. These companies aren’t training off of publicly available information, as I was saying, they’re torrenting the full copyrighted material in the exact same way a traditional pirate would, The only difference is what they’re doing with it afterwards.

    Edit: I don’t know if there’s evidence of Midjourney’s developers doing it specifically but Meta absolutely has so it’s a pretty safe assumption.

    Terrible idea man. Can you imagine Trump being in charge of funding all of the arts? I don’t want any government with that sort of power over creative endeavor.

    The current system works. You’re not paying for someone to hit copy paste, you’re paying for access to the idea that is physically embodied in the content if that makes sense. The creator decides whether you pay for that or not, and how much to pay. But many pirates don’t want to pay, don’t want to watch ad; in summary they simply believe that they are entitled to the work of the creative, which to me is absurd and outrageous.

    But yeah that’s what I meant about AI training. If there are Shrek images out there that Disney willingly published and I trained an AI on it there should be no issue because it would be no different than me looking at Shrek and then making a drawing of it.

  • Terrible idea man. Can you imagine Trump being in charge of funding all of the arts? I don’t want any government with that sort of power over creative endeavor.

    The current system works. You’re not paying for someone to hit copy paste, you’re paying for access to the idea that is physically embodied in the content if that makes sense. The creator decides whether you pay for that or not, and how much to pay. But many pirates don’t want to pay, don’t want to watch ad; in summary they simply believe that they are entitled to the work of the creative, which to me is absurd and outrageous.

    But yeah that’s what I meant about AI training. If there are Shrek images out there that Disney willingly published and I trained an AI on it there should be no issue because it would be no different than me looking at Shrek and then making a drawing of it.

    Yes but looking at publicly available shrek images is not what’s happening here, this is downloading every shrek movie

  • Yes but looking at publicly available shrek images is not what’s happening here, this is downloading every shrek movie

    Yeah I guess that’s what they’ll have to prove to win this.

  • Would it not then be better to buy a shady key to financially hurt the company?

    You mean cause a chargeback or something? You'd have to find a sufficiently shady seller, the key might get revoked, also you're supporting another ilk of scumbags.

    • Disney and NBCUniversal have teamed up to sue Midjourney.
    • The companies allege that the platform used its copyright protected material to train its model and that users can generate content that infringes on Disney and Universal’s copyrighted material.
    • The scathing lawsuit requests that Midjourney be made to pay up for the damage it has caused the two companies.

    Oh so when Big companies do it, it's OK. But it's stealing when an OpenSource AI gives that same power back to the people.

  • Drama. A business partner of the creators used an illegal loophole to obtain a majority stake of the company and then fired the actual creators because they where considered to volatile.

    The universe of Disco Elysium is Kurvitz paracosm which he has been creating since his teens. Its a part of their identity that they are now barred from expressing.

    Its a bit like if you told Tolkien halfway trough writing lotr that he is fired as the author and can never write anything about middle earth again.

    It's quite illustrative of DE's universe's relevance to our world though.

    (I'm more partial to SW KotORII: TSL, even if DE feels more like my life, even I wonder if Harry's ex is too not just a blindingly bright and quite f-ckable picture, but also a murderer ; too autistic to look for authors' contacts to ask them about it.)

    Barred from expressing with monetizing it, you certainly mean? Otherwise most of fan fiction would have to be censored, having IP owners not willing competition.

    And even then it's in question, there are plenty of crowdfunded and later paid for indie games set in Harry Potter universe. Those I'm thinking about are NSFW though.

  • Would it not then be better to buy a shady key to financially hurt the company?

    How so? Isn't it the same for the financial purposes?

  • You should totally play the game, but make sure that you pirate it so your money doesn't go to the thief who stole the rights from the creators.

    It's not actually a very fun game to play, reading the lore or watching a video of someone else play is sufficient.

  • 86 Stimmen
    31 Beiträge
    249 Aufrufe
    A
    You don’t have the power to decarbonize all electricity From the article: Location also affects how carbon emissions are managed. Germany has the largest carbon footprint for video streaming at 76g CO₂e per hour of streaming, reflecting its continued reliance on coal and fossil fuels. In the UK, this figure is 48g CO₂e per hour, because its energy mix includes renewables and natural gas, increasingly with nuclear as central to the UK’s low-carbon future. France, with a reliance on nuclear is the lowest, at 10g CO₂e per hour. This is a massive difference, and clearly doable, nothing that would be limited to the distant future. So I get this right? I'm naive for expecting govt regulations to put companies' behaviour under control, whereas you're realistic by expecting hundreds of millions of people deciding to systematically minimise their Youtube/Tiktok/Spotify/Netflix/Zoom usage? Hmm, alright. And yet in an another comment you also expect that Spotify shouldn't introduce video streaming, without any external regulation but out of pure goodness of their hearts?
  • 15 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    H
    No article to see here.
  • AMD warns of new Meltdown, Spectre-like bugs affecting CPUs

    Technology technology
    9
    1
    198 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    110 Aufrufe
    anyoldname3@lemmy.worldA
    This isn't really the same kind of bug. Those bugs made instructions emit the wrong answer, which is obviously really bad, and they're really rare. The bugs in the article make instructions take different amounts of time depending on what else the CPU has done recently, which isn't something anyone would notice except that by asking the kernel to do something and measuring the time to execute affected instructions, an attacker that only had usermode access could learn secrets that should only be available to the kernel.
  • EU says it will continue rolling out AI legislation on schedule

    Technology technology
    4
    1
    92 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    56 Aufrufe
    A
    I just can't get over how little we hear from academics RE: AI. It shows a clear disinterest and I feel like if they did bother to say anything it would be, "Proceed with caution while we study this further." Instead it's always the giant corporations with vested interest in this technology succeeding. It's just so painfully transparent.
  • Fully remote control your Nissan Leaf (or other modern cars)

    Technology technology
    27
    1
    145 Stimmen
    27 Beiträge
    257 Aufrufe
    B
    Never buy a tesla, Elon and any employee can just watch you, hell if they really wanted they could drive you into on coming traffic for the fun of it. Majority of those accidents were not.
  • Mudita Kompakt

    Technology technology
    17
    1
    62 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    154 Aufrufe
    anunusualrelic@lemmy.worldA
    There you go then. It's 80 €.
  • 93 Stimmen
    35 Beiträge
    267 Aufrufe
    D
    Same as American companies. Send you targeted ads and news articles to influence your world view as a form of new soft power.
  • How the Signal Knockoff App TeleMessage Got Hacked in 20 Minutes

    Technology technology
    31
    1
    188 Stimmen
    31 Beiträge
    361 Aufrufe
    P
    Not to mention TeleMessage violated the terms of the GPL. Signal is under gpl and I can't find TeleMessage's code anywhere. Edit: it appears it is online somewhere just not in a github repo or anything https://micahflee.com/heres-the-source-code-for-the-unofficial-signal-app-used-by-trump-officials/