I'm not sure what you're referring to as a far-right position?
The first is very pro-corporation in one way, but can lead to an argument for all intellectual works to be public domain.
The second is pro-mega-rights-owners, but also allows someone to write a story, publish it themselves, and make money without having it stolen from them.
The model itself is a derivative work. It's existence is what is under dispute. It's not about using the model to produce further works
So the government gets to ignore copyright, but nobody else?
No thanks.
Makers use the copyright system to their advantage as well though. If I write code and place it on github, the only thing stopping a mega corp stealing it is the copyright I hold.
Abolishing copyright is not a win.
...but you can manipulate through emotion, and the 2nd amendment is a touchstone for a lot of people.
Maybe you weren't trying to make the point I thought you were.
I assumed you were trying to say that a human can draw a picture of (for example) the Joaquin Phoenix Joker and not be committing copyright infringement, therefore an AI can do the same. I was pointing out that the basis of that argument is false. A human drawing that would be infringing the copyright.
It's his accent. He's British, but quite plainly spoken. There's quite a lot of "-ink" instead of "-ing" and "-ff-" instead of "-th-" (e. g. "nuffink" instead of "nothing"). The softer constanants are just characteristics of certain regions in the UK, but they can cause the sounds at the start/end of words to blur into each other.
To my ear, a fellow Brit, he's perfectly clear, but I can see how it could be slightly tricky for a non-native.
Yes, but will him not knowing when it'll rain really make a difference?
...and they are also infringing copyright if they have not been given a right to copy that work.
Oh! That's why torrent sites aren't under constant threat despite hosting tons of free copyright material.
Hang on.... Yes they are!
Open sourcing something is granting permissive licenses on copyright works. Again, it's a concept built assuming that copyright exists.
What you mean is "abolish copyright", and that means nobody can exclusivly benefit from creating something, especially in a digital world. Not you, or I, or your favorite author, or song writer. Publishers can just sell works without recognizing the author.
...which AI fails to do.