|
|
|
|
|
|
by CaptainFever
890 days ago
|
|
|
The argument is that trying to make more restrictive IP laws only benefits large corporations. Therefore the question is "only corporations have AI" or "everybody has AI". For the former, once the contributors have been paid, all of the capitalist-related issues that come with AI will still happen, just worse. More generally, the issues of artificial scarcity get worse as well, since now the models are no longer an abundant resource, but one controlled and restricted for profit. Unless the answer is just "I don't care if future people get screwed over, I just want to be paid once/receive pennies in royalty". Using your analogy, it's like minimum wage laws prevented open source software from existing because contributors need to be paid minimum wage. |
|
|
I'd say it's different, either you work directly on an open source project and you know the license your work is under, or you license your own work to be/not be allowed to be used by for-profit companies.
>More generally, the issues of artificial scarcity get worse as well, since now the models are no longer an abundant resource, but one controlled and restricted for profit.
Sure but that should be done on a higher level, that takes on copyright largely instead of just letting artists and writers be screwed over. We are currently in a situation that only benefits one party anyway.