• Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    149
    ·
    11 months ago

    It’s a little ironic that they protect SOME copyright and artistic styles (from giant corporations producing media) but not other copyright and artistic styles (independent artists and creators)

    So all the reasons they listed here, it’s ok to do that to everyone else just not Disney 😒

    Time to switch to the open source / self hosted / jailbroken creation tools instead

    • NumbersCanBeFun@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m fine with people continuing to do shit like this. Don’t profit off of it. Flood the entire internet with so much made up shit it waters down their brand into nothing.

      That’s a slippery slope fantasy in and of itself but I would love to see it 😅

    • Chozo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s not that ironic. In this case, the tool was creating a near-identical replication of the Disney logo. Generally, AI hasn’t been able to convincingly reproduce a logo like that with any degree of reliability (for instance, the jumbled logos in the Getty Images situation). It looks like the AI has actually advanced to the point where it actually violates Disney’s trademark. That crosses the line of fair use at that point.

      • I find that differentiation fir a logo silly though.

        copy pasting a logo on top after the ai generated the rest really isnt that difficult.

        So how would Disney know reliably that the memes are indeed made with a violation by MS?

        • null@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          They don’t need to determine on an individual basis. It’s simple enough to prove that the tool can do it, so they are enforcing that Microsoft make sure it can’t.

          • 9point6@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Photoshop can violate every trademark on the planet, Disney hasn’t slapped Adobe for copyright theft.

            • null@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              And Disney didn’t slap Microsoft for copyright theft either.

              And no, you can’t ask Photoshop to generate the Disney logo. You’d have to do that yourself.

      • cm0002@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        I noticed some of these posters had a much better Disney logo than the ones I was seeing before, there’s been some horrible monstrosities lmao

  • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    * cracks knuckles * Time to roll out a federated, truly open source generative AI and use it to ((checks notes)) mock Disney.

  • otl@lemmy.srcbeat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    “Reproduction of the Disney logo is clear trademark infringement. I would imagine that is why the AI might be jumbling the logo,” Andrew White, partner at IP law firm Mathys & Squire, tells The Financial Times.

    Doesn’t seem clear to me.

    I’m allowed to sketch out the Disney logo by hand, right? But I’m not allowed to place their trademark on any of my own products or services.

    Microsoft’s tool reproduces the Disney logo. Searching “Disney logo” in Google Images also reproduces the Disney logo. I can print the logo from my shitty black and white printer to my heart’s content, right?

    From Bing’s terms of use, section 7:

    Use of Creations. Subject to your compliance with this Agreement, the Microsoft Services Agreement, and our Content Policy, you may use Creations outside of the Online Services for any legal personal, non-commercial purpose.

    • Stoneykins [any]@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think they are arguing that using disney stuff as training data would be the infringement, and if the logo showed up in generated images, that would be proof they did that.

      But I’m guessing because it is phrased weird if they meant that. Idk.

      • jamesravey@lemmy.nopro.be
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        Seems like the lawyer thinks that AI models deliberately jumble the Disney logo rather than specific text/artifact/logo generation just being a weakness of these types of models. (He’s wrong, he’s attributing intent to something janky/buggy)

      • B0rax@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        That is always a dumb argument. People are also „trained“ by watching at the logo. You want to remove the logo from the world?

  • Pregnenolone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Absolute fuckin corporate losers. Can’t have anything fun or some company might have a little whinge

  • ExfilBravo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Steal millions of small artist works and no one bats an eye.

    Steal works from a mega corp and everyone loses their minds.

  • MonsiuerPatEBrown@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I have no faith in a boundless new well for imagination and creativity named AI if it is going to be squashed by the polemics of the billionaire class while stripping humanity from the rest of us.