• FlowVoid@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    That’s a public performance, which is a form of redistribution. That’s not relevant to AI training.

    Copyright law defines whether or not you can make a copy of a work. The person who owns the copyright can deny permission to make any copies, or grant you to make a permission to make a copy only under certain conditions. Those conditions are completely up to the copyright holder. They might prohibit public performance, but by no means is public performance the only thing that the copyright holder can prohibit. It’s simply a very common prohibition.

    You are trying to trying to generalize from a specific right, viewing the content on a browser, to a general right to “look” at the content, to the right to train an AI. But legally those are not the same at all. You may be granted some, all, or none of those rights.

    Suppose you are in a modern art gallery. You have been given the right to “look” at someone’s art. You can nevertheless be prohibited from making a photograph of the art, even if the camera is also “looking” at it. The owner of the art can attach whatever conditions they want to your photo, including how long you can keep it and exactly what you do with it.

    For example you could be allowed to photograph the art for home use but not for wider distribution. You could be allowed to photograph the art for classroom use, but not for AI training. If you are not willing to follow all of the conditions, then you can’t make a photo of the art at all.

    The same is true of text. Websites give permission to make a copy of their text for use on your browser. And they can set whatever rules they like for how else your copy may be used.

    Except for being banned from using public data that non-American AIs are able to use.

    Sure. Of course, America could also ban those non-American AIs from being used in the US. Just as America bans other products that infringe patents/IP.