Post AvWVcX0nur1eHTvbrk by jollysea@chaos.social
(DIR) More posts by jollysea@chaos.social
(DIR) Post #AvV66e7dFlWV3OrSHw by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T20:56:39Z
1 likes, 4 repeats
Dear @creativecommons ,I read your article about your initiative for new licenses for dataset holders in the AI industry.Let’s be clear: I do not want to re-license my hundreds of CC-By comic pages to please AI giants.I wish you would support CC artists suffering from massive plagiarism. You should enforce your own existing licenses against AI mass crawling. It seems you’ve joined the battle only after the casualties and still managed to side with the wrong people.https://creativecommons.org/2025/06/25/introducing-cc-signals-a-new-social-contract-for-the-age-of-ai/
(DIR) Post #AvV6GUOkGHfBn7YjeS by Ray_Of_Sunlight@mastodon.social
2025-06-25T20:58:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons I agree with you, And you gotta excuse me for my language...But the AI Giants can go suck over a thousand dicks followed by grabbing their AI garbage and shoved in the deepest part of their buttholes.
(DIR) Post #AvV6UrRNO4BVJIduxE by f4grx@chaos.social
2025-06-25T21:00:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons What a shame, creative commons. What would Aaron think about this?
(DIR) Post #AvV8rw8CJUC4QWnray by doctormo@floss.social
2025-06-25T21:27:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy I'd love to pick your brains about this particular news. From what I can read it looks so vague that it's no so much introducing something as inducing anxiety.I have no reaction because it doesn't appear to have anything in it. Perhaps out of sheer cowardice. It's hard to gauge anything other the a will to "do something" or be seen to be doing something at least.Interested?
(DIR) Post #AvV9dWxxBEQqHJhqpU by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T21:36:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ms_zwiebel @creativecommons Unfortunately, there is no mention of a 'no AI' rule... quite the opposite, in fact. You can read the four drafts by following the links here: https://github.com/creativecommons/cc-signals?tab=readme-ov-file#cc-signals-1 It's just an attempt to reinvent CC-By, but written 'for AI', so it's modern instead of enforcing their own legacy CC-By. There's also the promise of breadcrumbs for artists in the form of financial contributions, but it's the AI giants who decide who gets how much in good faith, lol. It cannot work.
(DIR) Post #AvVAWHLMxtolkmlTX6 by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T21:46:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@doctormo Sure! But I think the four links on their Github https://github.com/creativecommons/cc-signals?tab=readme-ov-file#cc-signals-1 with mini draft 'key idea' for the four new licenses speaks already a lot about the intent, the philosophy behind it.- Tailoring an attribution licence for AI giants in case they change their minds and decide to respect something.- Believing in the royalties breadcrumb system, whereby the AI lord decides in good faith (lol, their words) who receives the financial micro-percentage income from reuse. yay.
(DIR) Post #AvVAnDumxy2e2hPaW8 by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T21:49:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ms_zwiebel @creativecommons Yes, I'm curious to see how this draft will evolve. Hopefully they'll realise that a NOAI tag would be a welcome addition to the BY/SA/NC/ND family. But we can let them know this, can't we? 🙂
(DIR) Post #AvVBMQOgY8SitIBH3Q by davidbenque@mastodon.ie
2025-06-25T21:55:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons "a new pact" wow take that Big Tech 😂
(DIR) Post #AvVBaLmcV7O4dR14fw by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T21:58:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ArneBab @creativecommons Very true. I wish they could help creators and huge CC content providers enforce CC licensing in the era of AI. That's all. CC-By-Sa and Wikipedia are good examples of this. CC should fight to make all prompt output CC-BY-SA if they used Wikipedia.Also, what I wish for is a clear NOAI tag that artists could use, (eg. CC-BY-NOAI )This would complement the BY/SA/NC/ND toolset and make it easier to enforce the licence if the artwork were to be found in any dataset.
(DIR) Post #AvVBlPVJ0X99MOBvvc by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T21:59:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@deathkitten @creativecommons Yes, we clearly need a NOAI in the CC toolset of BY/NC/ND/SA... Something that would be enforcable in front of the law if the artwork is reused for AI. I'll be ready to use a "CC BY-NOAI" license like that if it existed.
(DIR) Post #AvVBz2hwYmL8iHbSRU by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T22:02:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Linebyline @ms_zwiebel I agree completely. The ideal would be to not have to opt out at all. If CC had a spine, it should be built-in every CC license by default.
(DIR) Post #AvVCH9GSv8cwGGNs1Y by Merovius@chaos.social
2025-06-25T22:05:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @ms_zwiebel @creativecommons My understanding is `ai=n` would mean to disallow any use by AI, no?
(DIR) Post #AvVCS6loXE9Xi7Gzei by alxlg@mastodon.social
2025-06-25T21:31:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@drikanis @davidrevoy @creativecommons Yeah, what we need is a way to prove that a model was trained against an author's work
(DIR) Post #AvVCS7nGjIuWsuxfYu by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T22:07:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@alxlg @drikanis @creativecommons https://haveibeentrained.com does a pretty good work at listing the images in the huge popular datasets. Got 11 pages for "pepper carrot" keywords... 😔
(DIR) Post #AvVD06Vk0NpgkhxvGa by doctormo@floss.social
2025-06-25T22:13:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy Heh, I notice one of the signals isn't "fuck off", but I guess that's just something we'll have to win in the courts.Looks like they've come at this from the idea of the maximally restrictive copyright regime where property rights had made sharing problematic to one where the law is allowing unconsenting abuse of works. Maybe hedging that copyright will be tightened.Though considering the gullibility of politicians with AI, I just don't see that yet.
(DIR) Post #AvVD8m41OdKVwX8Nkm by tischbein3@mograph.social
2025-06-25T22:15:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy As long as certain countries allow to circumvent copyright for dtata mining.they can create as many new icons as they want. As long as (C) does not work, CC wouldn't either.
(DIR) Post #AvVEDODjZZ4ZOdRSHQ by untsuki@udongein.xyz
2025-06-25T22:27:42.630515Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skobkin @davidrevoy From how I see it CC-BY licensed art is allowed for machine learning, except only if it actually follows the license. The fact that software companies cannot meaningfully do that in image generators and LLMs is not the fault of the license or people wanting their work to be at least credited.
(DIR) Post #AvVEachHumKsxILOGe by knbrindle@wandering.shop
2025-06-25T22:31:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons I just read this and... I have no idea what they're saying. It just seems to be an entire page of jargon and rah-rah devoid of any actual meaning.As far as I can see, the fundamental issue is that they're proceeding from the flawed position that the "AI" companies have any redeeming value to society at large whatsoever (they don’t), and that they care what license we publish under (they don’t).
(DIR) Post #AvVEu3Kx5pSX4yA4FU by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T22:35:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skobkin In my final sentence, the 'right people' metaphor clearly refers to the users of their licences: CC artists, authors and content creators. What they wrote here looks tailored to the AI giant industry. I would tell them that they are kissing up in the hope of receiving crumbs.Yes, CC should build the 'no AI' rule into all their license to protect users, and offer an 'AI' option in their toolset (BY/SA/NC/ND) for those who want to opt in. I think that would be fair.
(DIR) Post #AvVFCR8dL4yQ6tAKJs by marshray@infosec.exchange
2025-06-25T22:38:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy Looks like they have a wishy-washy page that speaks to some of that.https://creativecommons.org/about/legal-tools-licenses/Perhaps the creation, recognition, and use (or choice to not use) of a new “AI=Yes” license would go against whatever arguments fly now.Or they could just be flushing their credibility.
(DIR) Post #AvVFXGBnF5agEXZZyq by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T22:42:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skobkin @untsuki If the AI dataset has a CC-By input, the output is a derivative work and therefore the attribution should follow. This is a possible enforcement of the CC Attribution license.Also, the concept of 'style' does not apply to machines; they cannot define a style that is not connected to a clear input file. If a file was used in the process, it's reuse. That's all. ¯\(ツ)/¯
(DIR) Post #AvVFg6SOnOUAejYZwe by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T22:43:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@breizh @creativecommons @ArneBab True!
(DIR) Post #AvVFyEf12ARHJM6Wf2 by untsuki@udongein.xyz
2025-06-25T22:47:19.656823Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skobkin @davidrevoy You say that it's not how generative models work, and that they work like a human inspiration, but I disagree. If you directly use the work in the automatic process to get a result, it's not an inspiration. I'd say it fits more like it's an automated collage of different works, which in turn is a deriative work. And if you add about David in the prompt, you just indicate to the collage-making machine to put more pieces of his artwork into result.I don't think the fact that it's not a sets of pixels from original image being used, but weights of models that connect said sets of pixels to text changes that.
(DIR) Post #AvVG6LwRqYG0D583AO by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T22:48:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@knbrindle @creativecommons I think you understood the point correctly, immediately identifying the two major flaws in their reasoning. 👍 Yes, they worked hard on the rah-rah jargon to duck the issue, or perhaps they delegated this task to an LLM 🤣 I wouldn't be surprised at this point.
(DIR) Post #AvVGFAzXvakkr5mkRE by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-25T22:50:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skobkin @untsuki You are human, your brain will only learn what you like. What you care, yes, it's a privilege you have over a machine to learn a process from source, forget the source, and make it your own. A machine doesn't have this privilege.
(DIR) Post #AvVHCf0600XP0mPGJk by Em0nM4stodon@infosec.exchange
2025-06-25T23:00:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @alxlg @drikanis @creativecommons This exploitation of artists from AI corporations makes me so angry 🤬
(DIR) Post #AvVHR8gIRaHB7Q3888 by untsuki@udongein.xyz
2025-06-25T23:03:40.186343Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skobkin @davidrevoy Your reasoning relies completely on assumptions that we need to treat the automatic collage making machine as an artist because training "sort of" works like artist learning.But artists don't learn like that. They learn specific techniques, either from tutoring or from trying to mimic styles on their own, they get their life expirience, emotions, all of that changes how they see things.And model is just a tool that was set up to recreate statistically found patterns from input text and training data and output them as pixels. This way we occasionally get scrambled watermarks and signatures, and nearly 1:1 copies of some images.
(DIR) Post #AvVHmFf9gK9EqwaCaO by untsuki@udongein.xyz
2025-06-25T23:07:42.990093Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skobkin @davidrevoy Of course, it's an open ended question and a philosophical one, and we have different views on it, but, like, it's wrong to just say "okay, but apply the same for human artist" ignoring at least one whole post of reasoning why it's not the same.
(DIR) Post #AvVOzBHA0FkegsTJIW by Thad@brontosin.space
2025-06-26T00:28:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy I'm not sure what you mean by enforcing their licenses? They can only enforce their licenses on works they own; they don't have any right to enforce anyone else's copyrights, even if they wrote the license the work is published under.
(DIR) Post #AvVPHQ97SEL81SPMHo by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T00:31:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Thad Well, I'm sure they own a couple of things that AI could replicate, such as their own CC logos or pictures on their blog. They could use their legal expertise to conduct an exemplary trial, win it, and then set a legal precedent that would enable many other CC artists to follow in their footsteps.
(DIR) Post #AvVPlOkFEE1mMe4F6m by unknownpseudoartist@musician.social
2025-06-26T00:36:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons that's... sad. I totally support free culture and I love initiatives CC were doing for like 2 decades. Nowadays I release my original music as CC BY-SA and in the early 2010s I was also involved in totally different projects involving CC music. I might be totally wrong, but my impression is that things are pretty different and now most of the projects that used to advocate that strong for free culture are moving too close to AI bullshit.
(DIR) Post #AvVQ1wCiayqClmGxIO by fraggle@social.coop
2025-06-26T00:39:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons why would we believe they'd respect this when they don't even respect robots.txt
(DIR) Post #AvVRiHT21uempgepLU by tiefling@bardicperspiration.club
2025-06-26T00:58:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy"Expanding copyright to control AI training risks stifling innovation and access to knowledge."Yeah okay sure, not letting exploitative megagiant corpos whose peers have steadily eroded the public domain is totally comparable to individual creators not wanting megacorpos using thier data free of charge. @creativecommons, this is embarrassing.
(DIR) Post #AvVRy1lCCD6mkef7A0 by tiefling@bardicperspiration.club
2025-06-26T01:01:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy"Expanding copyright to control AI training risks stifling innovation and access to knowledge."Yeah okay sure. @creativecommons, this is embarrassing.
(DIR) Post #AvVSJ4kcGv3M6lQZw8 by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T01:05:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@indigoviolet @creativecommons Oh yes, +1 and seeing the CC logo and this thing next to it makes me want to... 🤢
(DIR) Post #AvVXUAFmeXNK8A73nk by brood@mas.to
2025-06-26T02:03:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons it's why i removed CC from everything i do, if there's no legal social contract there from automated corporations stealing source material creating products worth billions of dollars, the WTF does "fair use" really mean? fuck that.
(DIR) Post #AvVeO3FMUT6aLCwonA by bkuhn@floss.social
2025-06-26T03:20:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
This is just yet another example of how Creative Commons has, since its inception by Larry Lessig, was always designed policy from a libertarian sense of regulatory minimalism.I am not an expert on any area of creativity other than software, but I believe a strong regulatory regime that holds Big Tech accountable is paramount.“Moving fast and breaking things” should not be to default for policy makers who care about individual creators.Cc: @creativecommons
(DIR) Post #AvVpeCA0DV0Y7CLEP2 by NafiTheBear@snaggletooth.life
2025-06-26T05:26:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoyI upvoted this issue on their github maybe if helps if enough people are doing this: https://github.com/creativecommons/cc-signals/issues/14 @creativecommons
(DIR) Post #AvVqIpgMh6dmH1r94S by stephan@sonomu.club
2025-06-26T05:34:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons couldn't agree more. I have submitted an issue to the CC signals issue tracker, detailing the problems.https://github.com/creativecommons/cc-signals/issues/14But from the amount of time, energy and legalese mastery that went into those "signals", I fear we're too late voicing our concerns…
(DIR) Post #AvVtkwQPWCeR9lULjc by raccoon@hollow.raccoon.quest
2025-06-26T06:13:18.860Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy@framapiaf.org @creativecommons@mastodon.social Wrong and right ia subjective.But it does sound like they sided with the EVIL people, that's for sure.And if the evil side is the right side for someone that says a lot about that someone.
(DIR) Post #AvW1NcH94CLtdYXkzA by jimmyhoke@fosstodon.org
2025-06-26T07:38:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy Seems kinda selfish of you to prioritize your own art over the shareholder value you ought to be generating. People like you are forcing these poor investors to live without a third yacht!
(DIR) Post #AvW7NHn7pGgFpbjAVE by emilyenco@todon.nl
2025-06-26T08:45:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons Wow, this is such a bad decision.
(DIR) Post #AvWGLzNhgh9I21IEts by jums@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T10:26:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @ms_zwiebel @creativecommons Isn't what is proposed here: https://github.com/creativecommons/cc-signals?tab=readme-ov-file#implementation`ai=n` => ai equal deny seems like what you are looking for, no ?
(DIR) Post #AvWNv0MkiZcYtrUa5w by aaron@social.caskey-demaret.se
2025-06-26T11:50:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons At least the github issues page is somewhat heartening...https://github.com/creativecommons/cc-signals/issues
(DIR) Post #AvWQzfvYR4I4oxgn0S by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T12:25:23Z
6 likes, 2 repeats
@creativecommons Psss! After reading all those comments here, I just had to channel my inner artist. So, here’s my new logo for you; because clearly, you need all the help you can get in your new mission. You're welcome! 😂
(DIR) Post #AvWS8AGvb9xtCjIZ1s by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T12:38:03Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@oblomov Thank you and sure! Feel free to reuse it. I can't apply a CC license to it because the CC logo is trademarked, but let's say it's for 'fair use' and only on a non commercial and humorous purposes. 😉
(DIR) Post #AvWSAmirbwZJ2HcA40 by SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo
2025-06-26T12:38:56.397Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy@framapiaf.org @creativecommons@mastodon.social Shouldn't the answer be simple? If you use the BY license you're supposed to give appropriate attribution when you use the work to train an AI model. Why would this somehow be different now?
(DIR) Post #AvWSL47hlpvvtn8Uim by danslerush@floss.social
2025-06-26T12:40:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy Voire Creative Crawling :awesome:
(DIR) Post #AvWSOSTFhfwoHQpfSi by bretcarmichael@mastodon.social
2025-06-26T12:41:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons Unfortunately for artists, it looks like AI scraping for model training will be a legally allowed practice in the context of fair use, regardless of license. Protecting your work will need to be a technical effort. For your own site, you can put it behind Cloudflare. It has free tools that block scrapers.https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jun/26/meta-wins-ai-copyright-lawsuit-as-us-judge-rules-against-authors
(DIR) Post #AvWSRAr9eMtEWDJ82i by oblomov@sociale.network
2025-06-26T12:41:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy oh definitely, satire *is* one of the allowed fair uses 8-)
(DIR) Post #AvWSplOrQvNyo4nZAG by leah@chaos.social
2025-06-26T12:45:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy "building a more equitable, sustainable AI ecosystem rooted in shared benefits" Shared benefits? LOL. I don't want to share anything with fascist, world burning billionaires and their dream machines.I don't see why we need extra signals and I don't see how it would help if their bots circumvent any measures and contracts we had for ages. The ones who have to change are no we who want to share and value an open internet, its them who must change! creativecommons@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #AvWSpzBCCWm1XkVqoC by Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com
2025-06-26T12:46:23.045167Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @ms_zwiebel @creativecommons There is no need for a proprietary restriction on use like a "NOAI" tag (even though it wouldn't be a bad thing for proprietary LLMs not being able to benefit from the works); https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/programs-must-not-limit-freedom-to-run.html (although it's about software, the freedom to run is similar to the freedom to use).What would be far more effective would be to license under CC BY-SA 4.0 and enforce the license in the case that the work is used to train an LLM and the copyright information is stripped off and the SA conditions are not met.
(DIR) Post #AvWVcX0nur1eHTvbrk by jollysea@chaos.social
2025-06-26T13:17:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy They have a forum on github: https://github.com/creativecommons/cc-signals/discussions Would be cool if more people commented there, so they can't just ignore "a few people on mastodon".
(DIR) Post #AvWYPmQja0siCJfU0W by StarkRG@myside-yourside.net
2025-06-26T13:48:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @ArneBab @creativecommons While you're at it, make the attribution limited to only those sources used to produce a given output, not all the sources used to train it. That is pretty much impossible to do, of course, so should practically kill the whole thing off.
(DIR) Post #AvWaglIpE1IvX2C5jc by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T14:14:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@serge @creativecommons So many interesting questions, but I'm limited to 500 characters here on my instance (and I'm also limited by my 'french artist's brain' 🤣).Ping @doctormo , who is also interested in creating a discussion about the Free Culture Challenge in the era of AI.
(DIR) Post #AvWbdDBhhsvQoOjZlw by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T14:24:36Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@jollysea Thank you for linking it here. Yes, I read it yesterday and added my +1 to many threads.However, I don't expect them to change their minds or publish something about coming back on what they wrote. Creative Commons relies mainly on subsidies, so if they move in this direction, it's probably to follow the money. I'm sure they'll invent a new ethics policy to justify this and demonise anyone who opposes their plans...
(DIR) Post #AvWbk0xnYSXyvTTQga by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T14:25:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@elfi Exactly. 💜
(DIR) Post #AvWbucmtmQnh8DR13A by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T14:27:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@danslerush Oh, celle-ci est bien aussi! 😆
(DIR) Post #AvWcgTcXAORubGP8Jk by doctormo@floss.social
2025-06-26T14:36:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons Nice one! My own thughts went more towards how CC Signals shoulds like CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) that bullshit tech that governments love because it allows them to burn things.
(DIR) Post #AvWd4zwycJxVopevD6 by 4c31@mastodon.social
2025-06-26T14:40:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons Correct me if I'm wrong, but if they update their current licenses, you will have to relicense everything anyway.
(DIR) Post #AvWdEZEWnxLfqzQoOe by doctormo@floss.social
2025-06-26T14:42:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @serge @creativecommons Thanks for the tag in.There's a lot of questions to ask, although I admit to being interested in different ones centred on consent, the social implication of being abused without recourse, and of course then the active discussion on "signalling" can happen on top of those resolutions.So I guess we need a bunch of perspectives because we are not on the same page (might not even be the same book!)
(DIR) Post #AvWdLKRoAzvy1Vrplg by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T14:43:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@doctormo @serge @creativecommons Right. 👍
(DIR) Post #AvWeW0INXdmGf86vey by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T14:56:51Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@serge As you know, it's not an issue with LLMs, AI or the technique itself (src: even before the AI boom https://www.davidrevoy.com/article642/ , or more recently, Krita's and GMIC's own LLM experimentation on a small open/ethic dataset with consent).I have more of a problem with the abuse of the 'fair use', the impossibility of expressing a non-consenting opinion, and how my work, which has been crawled, contributes to something that infringes my moral and political beliefs (and threaten my own job).
(DIR) Post #AvWfX3Ova2fwXQEr4a by f4grx@chaos.social
2025-06-26T12:52:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@leah @davidrevoy @creativecommons yep what we want is just *less tigers eating faces* not more sharing with the tigers eating faces party.
(DIR) Post #AvWfX4CuaCer2Rclyy by vansice@infosec.exchange
2025-06-26T14:54:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@f4grx @leah @davidrevoy Today sounds like an excellent time to bring up Nightshade.https://nightshade.cs.uchicago.edu/whatis.html#AI #creativecommons
(DIR) Post #AvWfX4i6iDbybCDgbg by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T15:08:13Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vansice @f4grx @leah Not FLOSS + not for Linux = no thanks. Also, it is not known to be efficient enough. Attempts by other teams to replicate the protection on the dataset were ineffective. Simply scaling down or filtering the picture would break the protection. It's a shame.But it looks like they are building up a strong supporter base, using the authority artists figure bias to gain credibility. As soon as they make it commercial, they will make a lot of profit for sure...
(DIR) Post #AvWg1iNZmy8SJjE7OK by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T15:13:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@serge Yes...
(DIR) Post #AvWgZs4KGnDQDMVeRE by BetaRays@p.changeme.fr.eu.org
2025-06-26T15:14:01.654309Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy Wait, what does a language model have to do with Krita? Do you have a link with more information about this?
(DIR) Post #AvWgZtMRSvIiDpzdJY by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T15:19:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@BetaRays Sure, the experimentation was fully transparent https://krita.org/en/posts/2024/fast_sketch_plugin/ , and on the forum https://krita-artists.org/t/introducing-a-new-project-fast-line-art/94265 I was around to help Tiar, the sole developer on this project, with her progress. Many artists on the forum provided a selection of artwork, including sketches and corresponding line art, under an ethical licence to create a dataset that only Krita could use to train this 'filter on steroids' experiment.
(DIR) Post #AvWgtLJzjVvYRU7hw0 by f4grx@chaos.social
2025-06-26T15:23:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @vansice @leah not to mzntion they could also render it less/not effective and we wouldnt know. Nope nope nope!
(DIR) Post #AvWh58vVdvHbTWIUOe by f4grx@chaos.social
2025-06-26T15:25:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @vansice @leah oooofff it stinks! https://www.reddit.com/r/aiwars/comments/1al1utj/what_happened_to_nightshades_open_source_plans/
(DIR) Post #AvWhFiXm4e54psEnTc by BetaRays@p.changeme.fr.eu.org
2025-06-26T15:24:26.231007Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy Ah, I see, but that’s not a language model then. I was a bit scared there 😅
(DIR) Post #AvWhFjQ0ozSxY5c716 by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T15:27:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@BetaRays Sure, I sometimes use LLM for anything that has been trained on a dataset, even images. I should have used 'neural networks'. I'll make a quick edit to the footer of this toot. Thank you for spotting it!
(DIR) Post #AvWiSfC9w2xOAWreS0 by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T15:41:04Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@serge Yes, maybe they're waiting for a precedent-setting court case, probably involving major copyright issues, before trying anything with a CC licence.A big trial like the recent one where Disney and Universal are suing AI firm Midjourney¹ might unlock many things if they win.How ironic this is! I'm now rooting for a Disney intellectual property case. 🙃 (¹) https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg5vjqdm1ypo
(DIR) Post #AvWkaVHmrSJ3f2MZ3g by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T16:04:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@4c31 Not really, you can still publish under CC By-Sa 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en even if the 4.0 is most up to date now. That's one of the good thing about CC licenses, and Wikipedia, Open Game Art have many versions. When I wrote "I do not want to re-license my hundreds [...]" it was in a meaning that there is nothing that attracts me in benefiting the four new 'CC Signals' licenses proposal ( CR / CR-DC / CR-EC / CR-OP , https://github.com/creativecommons/cc-signals?tab=readme-ov-file#cc-signals-1 ).
(DIR) Post #AvWktaAEwqBgICvk2K by 4c31@mastodon.social
2025-06-26T16:08:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy I'm sorry if I didn't express myself correctly; English is not my first language. What I meant to say is that if you have CC X and then they launch CC Y, you would need to relicense if you want to use CC Y. However, with your clarification, I now understand what you mean.
(DIR) Post #AvWkzwKTS4Tum2kTgm by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T16:09:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@4c31 No worry, I'm on the same boat (French here), and it is not the first time that I miss the nuances in a discussion, especially on a complex topic like license. Thank you for the clarification too!
(DIR) Post #AvWsSKm0rUXANE7GjI by sgued@pouet.chapril.org
2025-06-26T17:33:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons given that a US judge just ruled that train a model on top of books is fair use what do you expect creative commons to be able to do to fight against that?https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c77vr00enzyoThe battle may not be lost in other jurisdiction but most AI companies are american so I don't really see what can be done.
(DIR) Post #AvWvZ4jNCou4VYmtgu by leah@chaos.social
2025-06-26T18:07:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @vansice @f4grx and also again: I don't want to do the work because others ignore the social contract.
(DIR) Post #AvX0IxRf1eKn37dXI8 by stk@chaos.social
2025-06-26T19:01:00Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @ArneBab while that sounds reasonable at first glance, it is questionable whether the licenses as they are now are even able to exclude using works that are CC licensed under current copyright legislation. CC has said so a number of times in posts spanning the last four years. Any “NOAI” license would furthermore not only apply to TDM for genAI training, but probably also for mechanisms that are meant to build, e.g. knowledge graphs based on the source material.
(DIR) Post #AvX1TDpJ4hBchn9g80 by lyonsinbeta@mastodon.social
2025-06-26T19:14:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons 🔥
(DIR) Post #AvX5eZvJeuRqEvdWxU by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T20:00:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ArneBab @prinlu @creativecommons Yes, and also you might accidentally get an AI output that is a blatant plagiarism without knowing it. You can't therefore be sure your output is public domain. Eg. if someone ask the AI to generate a warrior with a big sword in dark fantasy, and the AI generate Guts (Berserk). If you never see this manga and use the character as your concept-art for your video game project thinking it's public domain, you might run into big trouble with your final game.
(DIR) Post #AvX6bV9p1RbGXlWCES by nachof@mastodon.uy
2025-06-26T20:11:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoyI don't think we need any new @creativecommons licenses, the existing ones should be enough. We just want them to be respected. CC-BY means that if your LLM outputs something based on my stuff, I want to be credited.CC-SA means if your LLM uses my stuff, the model needs to be shared.CC-NC means if your LLM uses my stuff, you can't charge for using your LLM.The meaning of CC licenses is clear, we don't need new shit.
(DIR) Post #AvX9qfTZEy2Skgg4Ya by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T20:48:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ArneBab @prinlu @creativecommons I wish it was so simple as claiming that every output is "public domain", but it's more complex, esp. regarding Intellectual Property.Eg. The Terminator picture with a guitar generated (in your link) is clearly reusing the Terminator Intellectual Property. It's an accumulation of elements: the glasses, the face, body, the jacket... If you try to make a business with selling this picture, the copyright owner (StudioCanal) might sue you and win easily.
(DIR) Post #AvXCBMa8smi28vkUnA by davidrevoy@framapiaf.org
2025-06-26T21:14:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@prinlu @ArneBab @creativecommons No: the court refused the author of "A Recent Entrance To Paradise" to be copyrighted. Not a case of a owner fighting for their intellectual properties.The fact "it can't be copyrighted" doesn't mean it cannot be attacked if it degrades the Intellectual property of a brand, or owner, or bring them commercial prejudices. The result of this https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg5vjqdm1ypo will answer (on a US law POV) the debate around Intellectual Property usage in AI output...
(DIR) Post #AvYFXIHa2gOCCTAwwC by laumapret@toot.lv
2025-06-27T09:26:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons I'm very upset how little acknowledgement gets the fact that the gen-ai scene currently violates BY clause nonstop. They are not even trying. Not even by giving thousands of pages long list with every source they scrapped.
(DIR) Post #Avl7fzWoLyixpLlqOe by guyou@framapiaf.org
2025-07-03T14:29:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons A new topic for a new video of @vousavezledroit
(DIR) Post #Aw055kMBzsvtoPnBJo by adamsdesk@fosstodon.org
2025-07-10T19:41:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons It's possible I'm not seeing this perspective. As of right now it all seems counter intuitive. AI in itself violates copyright and those license that already exist. Why would the giants of AI care to all of a sudden agree to operate with respect and grace? Honestly it amazes me there is not wide spread lawsuits world wide against AI deliberate violations and fostering misinformation (confusion). The only positive I see in cc signals is starting the conversation.
(DIR) Post #Aw2nD7RzJqPplHkThY by natsume_shokogami@mastodon.world
2025-07-12T03:05:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @ArneBab @prinlu @creativecommons Regarding this and your previous point I think that in many cases, we (and also the models as well) may inadvertently create things with features similar to existing copyrighted works, and with enough resources someone can find some character to bootstrap a lawsuit and win, regardless that the other party don't even have any knowledge about that work/characters.
(DIR) Post #Aw2ov0FDZW0c6nGTkO by natsume_shokogami@mastodon.world
2025-07-12T03:24:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @prinlu @ArneBab @creativecommons But I heard that in the Midjourney case, they actually knowingly used copyrighted materials as advertisement and such, and don't provide much measures against generating copyrighted characters and works so it's like that they cannot use an excuse of not knowing about that and intentionally violated copyrights
(DIR) Post #Aw2pTNGIV44jLF9vmq by natsume_shokogami@mastodon.world
2025-07-12T03:30:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @ArneBab @prinlu @creativecommons In the blog post the other commenter provided above, the author knows that they generated Terminator (a copyrighted character) so it's considered some kind of unauthorized reproduction under copyright laws and since they know that it's extremely difficult if impossible to defend. And note that in machine learning and AI, if a model reproduces parts of its training data, it's considered overfitting and pretty much researchers are aiming to avoid that
(DIR) Post #AyXlxP0Hir0IhMvVWC by toxomat@social.tchncs.de
2025-09-24T21:31:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoyJust read their "advice" and interpretation of legal matters relating to "AI" and cc licenses. Mightily disappointed! While they wiggle to be technically probably not totally wrong (bunch o' lawyers after all), each text is prefixed by ".. uuhh, maybe copyright doesn't apply after all, maybe in your juristiction there is a fair use exception, maybe what we write is wrong and we err on the side of too much obligations for the "AI"- company."1/2@creativecommons
(DIR) Post #B1TkE1rMceaZ3Xmbtg by irina@wandering.shop
2025-12-21T16:29:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons I don't think I understand it! How do I signal "I don't want any AI scrapers to use my stuff, ever"?
(DIR) Post #B1TtKqsElVxqbAWHc8 by wbpeckham@techhub.social
2025-12-21T18:11:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@davidrevoy @creativecommons the only way I have found to deal with those people that gives any satisfaction at all is a scrape trap. Make sure there's a link early on every page, preferably hidden from human view, that links to a looping pseudo-random generator of text and generated images. It must contain several links back into the loop at a new address, so the scraper will scrape total garbage, and then follow the links to scrape additional total garbage forever. If we cannot shoot them and we cannot lock them, we can at least poison the well.