| > In all seriousness, midjourney is like any other tool. You can break the law with it, big surprise. I believe the point was rather that the output makes it obvious the "tool" was trained on copyrighted work. As an aside to your justification though, if a main purpose of a tool is to circumvent copyright, that tool is usually illegal. > I watched Batman, does that mean if I draw caped super heroes I am stealing training data? It means if you draw a near copy and tried to sell it, you are committing copyright "theft" (I don't like the term, but that's what it's called). > Nobody is interested in copies or impressions of popular art, otherwise the guy selling animes on velvet at the local art fair would be making more money People are absolutely interested. I couldn't get RedBubble to even print a non-copyrighted work (which they mistakenly thought was copyrighted) that I had altered. Just because some people are getting away with it, doesn't mean it's legal or wouldn't immediately come to a stop if they came under scrutiny. > This just sounds like a Luddite shaking his fist at this perceived enemy. Luddites had some very good points, so he's in good company. |