Sandbar_Trekker

joined 5 months ago
[–] Sandbar_Trekker@lemmy.today 2 points 1 hour ago

Nice! The main character was fairly consistent across the scenes. Still some improvements to be made, but keep up the great work!

[–] Sandbar_Trekker@lemmy.today 2 points 1 hour ago

I think you're in the wrong community...

[–] Sandbar_Trekker@lemmy.today 12 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Its probably better this way.

Otherwise you end up with people accusing movies of using AI when they didn't.

And then there's the question of how you decide where to draw the line for what's considered AI as well as how much of it was used to help with the end result.

Did you use AI for storyboarding, but no diffusion tools were used in the end product?

Did one of the writers use ChatGPT for brainstorming some ideas but nothing was copy/pasted from directly?

Did they use a speech to text model to help create the subtitles in different languages, but then double checked all the work with translators?

Etc.

[–] Sandbar_Trekker@lemmy.today 1 points 3 weeks ago

Too far would be anything outside of fair use. If a user generates an image of a specific copyrighted character, then attempts to make money off of that image, they could be sued.

You can't copyright a style, but there's still a lot of legal grey area here.

It's also worth noting that OpenAI has an indemnification clause in their Terms of Use. This means that if someone else goes after OpenAI for something that went viral and was created by a specific user, OpenAI can then turn around and bill that user for all legal fees incurred by them (whether they win or lose the case).

If anyone is into using AI for anything, I would strongly suggest that they avoid using (or at least publishing/posting about) any of OpenAI's tools especially while all of these legal issues are still being sorted out.

[–] Sandbar_Trekker@lemmy.today 7 points 4 months ago

Her nonexistance is starting to rub off on him.