Skip to content

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

Technology
68 40 55
  • 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.

  • "Piracy" isn't piracy.

    It depends. Pirating a specific thing created by someone I think is not good. Ask almost any creator on the Web.

    While using motives, aesthetics, characters, universes ... is usually something that shouldn't be subject to IP law, but in fact is, because the law is not written with any creators in mind, it's intended to create convenient conditions for big businesses.

  • It depends. Pirating a specific thing created by someone I think is not good. Ask almost any creator on the Web.

    While using motives, aesthetics, characters, universes ... is usually something that shouldn't be subject to IP law, but in fact is, because the law is not written with any creators in mind, it's intended to create convenient conditions for big businesses.

    It depends.

    It doesn't 🙂

    Piracy is a sea ship attack. "Unauthorized copying" is the term you seek. Copying doesn't involve attacks, killing, or even robbing, but piracy -- does. And no, it isn't just some terminology casus. Law strictly differentiate killing, raping, robbing and unauthorized copying.

    No, I don't talk stupid shit. It is important.

  • It depends.

    It doesn't 🙂

    Piracy is a sea ship attack. "Unauthorized copying" is the term you seek. Copying doesn't involve attacks, killing, or even robbing, but piracy -- does. And no, it isn't just some terminology casus. Law strictly differentiate killing, raping, robbing and unauthorized copying.

    No, I don't talk stupid shit. It is important.

    It's important propaganda-wise, because it supports a subconscious association between unauthorized copy and and capturing a vessel with its crew. I agree.

    What I meant is - unauthorized copying is sometimes too morally very similar to a robbery. There are people, not living very rich, who depend on it happening more rarely. Of course they are being robbed by intermediaries always and by us sometimes, but they still feel it.

  • It's important propaganda-wise, because it supports a subconscious association between unauthorized copy and and capturing a vessel with its crew. I agree.

    What I meant is - unauthorized copying is sometimes too morally very similar to a robbery. There are people, not living very rich, who depend on it happening more rarely. Of course they are being robbed by intermediaries always and by us sometimes, but they still feel it.

    It’s important propaganda-wise, because

    Exactly

    copying is sometimes too morally very similar to a robbery

    Never. Robbery involves violence plus moving something of value from the victim to the robber. Your moral compass is broken already by the propaganda you mentioned earlier.

    You may think that copying is "bad" in some cases but it never "armed violent values extortion" bad. Never.

  • 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.

    Are you saying that the mere action of scraping is fair use, or that absolutely anything you do with the data you scrape is also fair use?

  • 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.

    Fanfiction and non monetised use is not at all exempt from these laws but rather tolerated by the copyright holder. Something tells me this one wont tolerate if the og creator posts anything and they may know enough background canon to know its them.

    A real irony to the plot of the game is that the business partner wanted to reign in the freedom of the creators. Not impossible they deemed it to political.

    I am not sure about those games you mentioning but its possible they are tolerated because a combination of plausible deniability (wizard uk boarding school isnt that orginal) and not wanting it to gain any more publicity. Disney did the same thing ignoring Micky mouse porn.

  • Remember when stealing on sea was piracy? Always has been.

    Copyright infringement is different.

    Yes. Piracy in the sense of stealing from ships in international waters is different from piracy in the sense of copyright infringement. Thanks for that.

  • No problem, how much is "everything" in USD?

  • It’s important propaganda-wise, because

    Exactly

    copying is sometimes too morally very similar to a robbery

    Never. Robbery involves violence plus moving something of value from the victim to the robber. Your moral compass is broken already by the propaganda you mentioned earlier.

    You may think that copying is "bad" in some cases but it never "armed violent values extortion" bad. Never.

    I agree. I had a "pleasure" to experience the difference.

    That also involved learning that human society consists of apes, real danger is always very close and no police will help you against it, thus right to carry arms is paramount. Preferably allowing you to kill a tank.

  • Fanfiction and non monetised use is not at all exempt from these laws but rather tolerated by the copyright holder. Something tells me this one wont tolerate if the og creator posts anything and they may know enough background canon to know its them.

    A real irony to the plot of the game is that the business partner wanted to reign in the freedom of the creators. Not impossible they deemed it to political.

    I am not sure about those games you mentioning but its possible they are tolerated because a combination of plausible deniability (wizard uk boarding school isnt that orginal) and not wanting it to gain any more publicity. Disney did the same thing ignoring Micky mouse porn.

    Fanfiction and non monetised use is not at all exempt from these laws but rather tolerated by the copyright holder.

    Should fix that in law, based on the commonality of such use.

    IP companies use every such opening, we should too.

    combination of plausible deniability (wizard uk boarding school isnt that orginal)

    Except they even use character names from HP.

    Publicity - maybe, would be funny.

  • Fanfiction and non monetised use is not at all exempt from these laws but rather tolerated by the copyright holder.

    Should fix that in law, based on the commonality of such use.

    IP companies use every such opening, we should too.

    combination of plausible deniability (wizard uk boarding school isnt that orginal)

    Except they even use character names from HP.

    Publicity - maybe, would be funny.

    I would personally argue that fixing the law means getting rid of the notion of intellectual property all together.

    In my own reasoning someone copying me is the highest form of flattery and i would still have an edge understanding the properties of own idea better then the copycat does.

    Its a huge limiter on human progress and absolutely non sensical in situations where multiple people just happen to have a similar idea. As it stands now an employee could invent the cure to cancer, the employer claiming it and then putting it in a vault to never use and bar anyone from creating it.

    Naturally such idea of abolishing copyright receives lots of criticism from many people because we would have to solve other problems that copyright now aims to fix but i don't think that justifies the damage it does.

  • Yes. Piracy in the sense of stealing from ships in international waters is different from piracy in the sense of copyright infringement. Thanks for that.

    I didn't mean to suggest that. I consider calling copyright infringement "piracy" to be propaganda started by the music industry to push their monetary interests. A derogatory term that conflates it with immoral stealing (and murder). This overstates any harms caused.

  • Rediscovering Human Purpose in the Age of AI

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    3 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    capuccino@lemmy.worldC
    well, it seems that the rich will stay rich, no matter what. It's incredible that people see AI as a religion now
  • Is AI Apocalypse Inevitable? - Tristan Harris

    Technology technology
    11
    1
    121 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    V
    Define AGI, because recently the definition is shifting down to match LLM. In fact we can say we achieved AGI now because we have machine that answers questions. The problem will be when the number of questions will start shrinking not because of number of problems but number of people that understand those problems. That is what is happening now. Don't believe me, read the statistics about age and workforce. Now put it into urgent need to something to replace those people. After that think what will happen when all those attempts fail.
  • getoffpocket.com, my guide to Pocket alternatives, just got a redesign

    Technology technology
    23
    85 Stimmen
    23 Beiträge
    25 Aufrufe
    B
    I've made some updates. There are many perspectives to view a guide like this. I hope there are some improvements to the self-hosting perspective. https://getoffpocket.com/
  • 404 Stimmen
    143 Beiträge
    78 Aufrufe
    M
    If anyone ever tells you they can't hire enough of blank they are lying to you. People have been running excellent 911 service all over the country for longer than I've been alive maybe they should ask someone?
  • How will the space race affect our environment? (Video 25mins)

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    17 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • How a Spyware App Compromised Assad’s Army

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    41 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    S
    I guess that's why you pay your soldiers. In the early summer of 2024, months before the opposition launched Operation Deterrence of Aggression, a mobile application began circulating among a group of Syrian army officers. It carried an innocuous name: STFD-686, a string of letters standing for Syria Trust for Development. ... The STFD-686 app operated with disarming simplicity. It offered the promise of financial aid, requiring only that the victim fill out a few personal details. It asked innocent questions: “What kind of assistance are you expecting?” and “Tell us more about your financial situation.” ... Determining officers’ ranks made it possible for the app’s operators to identify those in sensitive positions, such as battalion commanders and communications officers, while knowing their exact place of service allowed for the construction of live maps of force deployments. It gave the operators behind the app and the website the ability to chart both strongholds and gaps in the Syrian army’s defensive lines. The most crucial point was the combination of the two pieces of information: Disclosing that “officer X” was stationed at “location Y” was tantamount to handing the enemy the army’s entire operating manual, especially on fluid fronts like those in Idlib and Sweida.
  • 471 Stimmen
    99 Beiträge
    54 Aufrufe
    J
    Copyright law is messy. Thank you for the elaboration.
  • 0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    L
    Divide and conquer. Non state-actors and special interest have a far easier time attacking a hundred small entities than one big one. Because people have much less bandwidth to track all this shit than it is to spread it around. See ALEC and the strategy behind state rights. In the end this is about economic power. The only way to curb it is through a democratic government. Lemmy servers too can be bought and sold and the communities captured that grew on them.