[Intralexical]

> If it's theft, then your brain belongs to Disney and you need to start forking over your salary. Your connectome is littered with their platitudes.

I think it's quite telling that sooner or later, every discussion about "AI" and copyright ends up equating people to statistical models controlled by predatory megacorporations.

My connectome, in the eyes of the law, has a special legal status which is not shared by inanimate and non-sentient objects. In fact, some would argue that the entire point of the law should be to protect the special legal status of my connectome from those that would draw an equivalence between people and property.

[echelon]

You're invoking sorcery. Go check out open source AI. AnimateDiff, RVC, and the whole wealth of LLM models.

[Intralexical]

Human rights=Sorcery. Cool.

"Open-source AI" is interesting in multiple ways, but not relevant to the legality of the models.

You know the "If ML is IP infringement then your brain is owned by Disney" take is just as sensible (and specious) for pre-ML stuff too, right? You're allowed to memorize the full script of any movie you want, without anyone trying even a little to claim that doing so should reduce your legal status to chattel, but obviously you're not allowed to just rip the subtitles from a DVD and sell it as a book.