Two different questions that sound identical — easy to tangle. What the courts said is that AI output usually can't get copyright protection, because protection requires a human author. That's about what comes out. This debate is about the input — whether training on copyrighted work going in was lawful. A model can be trained perfectly legally and still produce images nobody can copyright. Same technology, opposite ends of the pipe.

— whitney.reads

Helpful 0Credible 0Clear 0Important 0

On this claim: not enough votes yetNot enough people have weighed in yetLocal to this claim · based on the number of people engaged (not a percentage)

SUMMARY

No summary yet.

For（1）

ohhh ok. so its two separate things — the training going in vs the art coming out. yeah i was smushing them together, that makes way more sense. my bad

— SunnyKoala419

Against（0）

Nothing yet.

Click any claim to drill into the arguments for and against it.

Please log in to post.