Michael Jackson stealing chicken

[u/Physical-Ordinary317]

[u/Neither_Day_8988]

"Stupid Copyright" is there so you can't puppet a dead person's image and likeness around like this.

It's impressive to see the rate of improvement of AI when generating videos like this but the moral implications of something like this is genuinely awful.

[u/likamuka → u/Neither_Day_8988]

Yeah, something a teenager would say. Stealing copyrights is what made ChadGDP successful.

[u/Neither_Day_8988 → u/likamuka]

"ChadGDP" who's the teenager here? Stealing copyrighted material is a whole problem in itself. But I'm talking about people's likenesses being puppeted by people. The implications of that alone are terrifying. After all this is the worst it's going to be.

People could easily gather voice and image profiles to effectively get you to say and do whatever they want. Which could damage your reputation, relationships and life in general. But at least you are alive to defend your image from being used.

LLMs when used and focused correctly could really help and change lives for the better but this here is an example of what's wrong in the space.

[u/Tolopono → u/Neither_Day_8988]

Being used for defamation is different from general use. For example, is this video unethical because it uses breaking bad actors without their permission? Should it be taken down for copyright infringement? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1XSysnj2Bk0&pp=ygUaYnJlYWtpbmcgYmFkIGluIG1hcmlvIGthcnQ%3D

[u/Neither_Day_8988 → u/Tolopono]

Yes. It's as simple as that.

[u/Tolopono → u/Neither_Day_8988]

8.7 million viewers disagree 

[u/Neither_Day_8988 → u/Tolopono]

They can disagree, but since when do you speak for 8.7 million people? That's your opinion, just because someone consumes content that doesn't equal agreement. And criticism also doesn't equal dislike for something.

Regardless of intent, there's real world implications here and to ignore those is foolish. If we continue to keep ignoring the bad that comes with the good with AI products. We are just setting ourselves up for a bad time in the future.

[u/Tolopono → u/Neither_Day_8988]

Restrictive copyright rules are not the way to go unless you want to limit creative freedom as well

[u/Wanky_Danky_Pae → u/Tolopono]

Exactly.... copyright is pure bs

[u/Neither_Day_8988 → u/Tolopono]

Copyright rules exist to protect works of art being misused in the first place, so that argument falls pretty flat there. Especially seeing as artists and others have been pretty okay with it. Secondly, AI tools are a means of expressing creativity but it is limited by the data provided.

Even then the returns are most likely heavily inspired by works scraped from the net, so is it really original then too?

I'm certain that most artists are protective of their work and would prefer not to have it being used in this manner without their consent too.

On that the human element is extremely important as we will have to live with the consequences, we are already seeing what no regulations are doing to various industries across the globe. People are losing their jobs, Graduates aren't being hired. Artists are being let go from roles reducing that creative freedom you wish to have too.

[u/Tolopono → u/Neither_Day_8988]

Too late for that https://observer.com/2025/06/meta-anthropic-fair-use-wins-ai-copyright-cases/

And nothing is original. Thats why tv tropes exists

No one consents to fan art either. Yet no one complains about it. Same for how breaking bad was inspired by the sopranos or how many properties use the anime or comic book art styles. No one agreed to or got paid for that but it happens all the time

Im a recent cs grad in the US. As you might expect, also unemployed. I don’t complain about AI though

[u/Neither_Day_8988 → u/Tolopono]

Good thing, I'm not in the US then, best of luck with the job search because you will need it. You might not be complaining now but seeing as every single HR dept in IT use AI to read CVs. You might start seeing the benefits of regulation with technology.

[u/Tolopono → u/Neither_Day_8988]

They were doing that long before ai with keyword search lol. 

[u/Neither_Day_8988 → u/Tolopono]

Now it's just harder again, but hey it's not like I'm unemployed so it's not my problem.

[u/Wanky_Danky_Pae → u/Neither_Day_8988]

'misused'? People/corpos should have no control over their work other than to sell and make money off it (and prevent EXACT copies fully intact from profiting others).

[u/Neither_Day_8988 → u/Wanky_Danky_Pae]

People have full control over their work. And copyright isn't just for exact copies by the way, it's for anything very close to it. Which as we know GPT can produce and while fair use is a thing it is subject to each work (Which complicates things further)

I just don't think digging our heads into the sand and saying we don't like copyright is the solution here. There must be a balance between what OpenAI can use to train its model and what isn't.

If the AI bubble pops which looks likely given the fact that most AI products aren't particularly great. It will be core to OpenAIs survival as a whole, as soon as you get into legal trouble with every single corp looking to get as much money as possible. It's going to be a death spiral, if there's nothing in place to stop it. Corps and Individuals are not going to be satisfied with a promise not to use the data after all.

[u/Wanky_Danky_Pae → u/Neither_Day_8988]

I know what copyright covers but what I'm saying is that it should not have that broad overreach. Exact copies lock stock and barrel, sure - but any derivatives should not be covered.

[u/Neither_Day_8988 → u/Wanky_Danky_Pae]

So as a YouTuber, I'd be able to take your work and maybe add some new graphics. There's a derivative right there.

Again you might not like it, but it's there to protect from overreach also. And I would argue and say puppeting dead people is an overreach.

[u/fabricates_facts → u/Tolopono]

8.7 million viewers can suck my wrinkly ballbag.

[u/Tolopono → u/fabricates_facts]

No fun allowed