• ElectronSoup@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Doubtful, courts have already ruled AI isn’t a ‘person’ who can create a copyrighted work, thus a non-person can’t be held liable for defamation most likely.

    • @ElectronSoup @borari @Spitfire that’s just mathwashing:
      https://www.mathwashing.com/

      The tool cannot be liable itself, obviously, but the creators of the tool and those who wield it absolutely can, depending on specific circumstances.

      The “AI” does not “create independently”. Just like a script with some randomness built in does not “create independently”. Somebody designed and built the tool, somebody decided what training data to use, somebody decided to deploy it. These people are liable.

      • borari@sh.itjust.worksOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The tool cannot be liable itself, obviously, but the creators of the tool and those who wield it absolutely can…

        I absolutely agree with you here. The creators of the tool are responsible for its content. I’m a complete supporter of Section 230 in the US, but I absolutely do not think that sort of protection should apply to companies like OpenAI. Their tool created the content, their tool “published” the content, they are responsible for that content.