Ai... Warner suing Elon Musk on behalf of Roger Deakins

[Andrew Reid]

Apparently Tesla marketing boffins fed Bladerunner 2049 stills into Grok to come up with the close likeness, which they then proceeded to use for marketing purposes at the unveiling of the Robotaxi.

What a world.

Should be an interesting case to watch to see what precedent is set for ai-generated movies and photography.

Can you really copyright a lighting style and colour grade?

https://petapixel.com/2024/10/22/elon-musk-and-tesla-sued-for-using-ai-generated-blade-runner-2049-images-at-robotaxi-event-cybercab-alcon/

[Davide DB]

I think the theme of the argument is slightly different.

If AI is able to generate images quite similar to the movie Blade Runner 2049, it [probably] means that the AI has been fed images from the movie that are copyrighted...

in short, it is the “video” version of the same lawsuits filed by NY Times and other news outlets complaining that OpenAI trained its AI engine with text from their articles.

In any case, it will be interesting to see how it turns out because a case like this will set an important precedent for all countries that adopt common-law.

P.S.

https://harvardlawreview.org/blog/2024/04/nyt-v-openai-the-timess-about-face/

https://www.pillsburylaw.com/en/news-and-insights/discovery-lawsuit-new-york-times-openai.html

[Andrew Reid]

Microsoft has the argument, that the open web is fair use and can be fed page by page into the machine.

In same way Google indexes the WWW.

If they decide against AI and the derivative works are not allowed to be neural network influenced by other works, it might have some unintended consequences - such as preventing human artists from using their influences.

After all, ai and us are working in pretty similar ways.

Maybe the difference here is that the data of the literal original is crunched. It is dissolved up into numbers and understood in terms of patterns and styles by the machine. So those original 1s and 0s are stored on OpenAI's server, in totality and their entirety.

Whereas a human artist, never has a precise copy of the exact original digital work in our head... only the abstract version in working memory.

[webrunner5]

Well, I don't think they have any chance of winning the lawsuit. To really think the two scenes are just alike is pushing reality are bit too far. Heck downtown Detroit a few years ago on a bad smog day looked nearly like it in some areas. Hell Gary, Indiana still looks like this.

It's like the Music industry complaining about copyright stuff, there are Only 12 notes in western music, and after all these years people really think something is truly "Original". Most pop songs in the 50's though the 70's are based on classical music done 400 to 700 years ago. Don't think any of those songs were taken off the air.

I am 77 years old now, have been all over the world other than the far east, been in the US Navy for 4 years, been in bands, had all kinds of jobs, lots of different hobbies, owned over 200 cars, been married twice, have kids, ergo, I have seen a LOT in my life, done a Lot in my life, and to say something is new, never been done, I say BULLSHIT.

No fan of Elon, or Telsa but if this is the worst thing we face in the world, please nuke us all and put us out of our misery, please..

[eatstoomuchjam]

That looks literally nothing like Gary, IN...  ever.

And yes, it is a real concern if human artists can take months to build something, only for a bunch of untalented fakers to shit out hundreds of AI imitations overnight afterward.  If you think it's a concern that melodies in pop music are similar to progressions in music that's hundreds of years old, I would urge you to familiarize yourself with the concept of public domain.

Anyway, as with other things, the main thing that will or won't kill AI for this sort of thing will be whether what it produces can be copyrighted.  If Musk's stupid ego-stroking horseshit videos can't be copyrighted due to being generated by AI, there's nothing to stop internet users from drawing dicks all over them and reposting the next day or competitors using them, etc.

[webrunner5]

If worrying about copyrighted content is our top priority in this world as of now wow, we are in deep piles of dog you know what. We are not going to stop this, not ever with AI now, the cat is out of the bag forever, no going back. Just like Drone warfare now has changed forever how Wars down the road are going to go. Hell even an aircraft carrier is in danger from some little-known country.

I am glad I am at the end of my life. You younger people are going to be a "F ed" chicken going forward. This world is going to be like a knife fight, rules what rules.

And oh this is a picture of Chicago, looking the other way at Gary, well it "ain't" far off from looing just like it. Hey, I live about 80 miles from Gary, been there. Gee that picture sort of looks like it may have been ripped off for some movie doesn't it! Funny world.

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/401383385522700258/

[eatstoomuchjam]

OK, boomer.

[webrunner5]

Hey, I agree with your statements. The right and fair way to go. But this world now is not right and fair. Money has Totally taken over everyone's little brain, rich or poor and we are well, just screwed, plain and simple.

Yeah, I am a Boomer, but I have seen a total shift in my lifetime to this world being a total shitshow now. It is not just in this country alone. 50 years ago the world seemed pretty fair, well not if you were in sub-Sharahna Africa, but now we All seem to be in sub-Sharahna Africa mode if you are not in the top 10%. And the trend even has a worse outlook forward. It isn't looking good boys and girls. Right now a heck of a lot people that are young wished they had been a Boomer. It was a great ride.

[sanveer]

17 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Apparently Tesla marketing boffins fed Bladerunner 2049 stills into Grok to come up with the close likeness, which they then proceeded to use for marketing purposes at the unveiling of the Robotaxi.

What a world.

Should be an interesting case to watch to see what precedent is set for ai-generated movies and photography.

Can you really copyright a lighting style and colour grade?

https://petapixel.com/2024/10/22/elon-musk-and-tesla-sued-for-using-ai-generated-blade-runner-2049-images-at-robotaxi-event-cybercab-alcon/

Every AI is stolen work. I remember watching some asian film whose story was apparently written by AI, which turned out to be a Hindi film, released a few years before.

All major Corporations into AI, are using copyrighted and private work without explicit permissions, release and compensation. Starting with Google and Microsoft. 

The question is how much similarity can quality as AI work, and how much would impinge upon the original. This colour scheme and grade hardly seems absolutely unique or never used in film before. Also people wearing coats or high rises in the background is also not really one of a kind. 

Hollywood and Dems are just frustrated with Musk. This probably is just an excuse to try and take him to court. They'll go to any extent to sue, silence and cancel anyone on the opposite side.

[Andrew Reid]

3 hours ago, sanveer said:

Every AI is stolen work. I remember watching some asian film whose story was apparently written by AI, which turned out to be a Hindi film, released a few years before.

All major Corporations into AI, are using copyrighted and private work without explicit permissions, release and compensation. Starting with Google and Microsoft. 

The question is how much similarity can quality as AI work, and how much would impinge upon the original. This colour scheme and grade hardly seems absolutely unique or never used in film before. Also people wearing coats or high rises in the background is also not really one of a kind. 

Hollywood and Dems are just frustrated with Musk. This probably is just an excuse to try and take him to court. They'll go to any extent to sue, silence and cancel anyone on the opposite side.

If every Ai work is stolen then every human experience is a stolen one as well, because that's how we learn about the world. This technology can't be trained on the arts or reality by putting it out there with a pair of eyes, ears and arms, it has to be spoon fed, but essentially the result is the same and very human. Info goes in. Processing happens. Self expression comes out the other end in the form of observation, both personal and subjective, and arising from that - art in various audio-visual formats.

So good luck to the lawyers on that one, lol.

When it comes to Musk, certainly a very complex character who has gone from being on the cutting edge of two very good businesses (SpaceX and Tesla) to being on the sidelines of both with no real decision making power, having a midlife crisis mental breakdown where he spends 44 billion on a website (still can't believe I typed BILLION not million) and proceeds to wreak the business model of it. That to me is the act of either a very sick person or a stupid person and as we know he's not your typical stupid, it must be the former!

Musk is behind in Ai and desperate to catch OpenAi which of course he had early involvement in before throwing his toys out the pram with Sam.

Musk in terms of his recent politics has further taken him down a destructive path / rabbit hole, and yes he clearly has fallen out with his elite corporate Dem supporting buddies and venture capitalists somewhere along the way.

But then drugs will do that.

[Al Dolega]

On 10/25/2024 at 12:12 PM, webrunner5 said:

Heck downtown Detroit a few years ago on a bad smog day looked nearly like it in some areas.

Mmmmmno it didn't. I'm 44 and only have vague memories of smog in Detroit from my childhood in the 80's. And that is not a few years ago.

On 10/25/2024 at 6:35 PM, webrunner5 said:

50 years ago the world seemed pretty fair

Sure, to a white, male, boomer, in America.

[Ilkka Nissila]

On 10/26/2024 at 3:22 PM, Andrew Reid said:

If every Ai work is stolen then every human experience is a stolen one as well, because that's how we learn about the world. This technology can't be trained on the arts or reality by putting it out there with a pair of eyes, ears and arms, it has to be spoon fed, but essentially the result is the same and very human. Info goes in. Processing happens. Self expression comes out the other end in the form of observation, both personal and subjective, and arising from that - art in various audio-visual formats.

Even if the learning models were similar (in my opinion, they're not, as human learning is focused on biologically relevant things whereas AI models learn what they are taught using algorithms and training data), AI models are not humans and they don't have the same legal rights as humans. People put their work on display online for other humans to see, not to be siphoned into AI models to be sold for profit by companies who are so large that their leaders think the they can just ignore the law, break it at will, and deal with the aftermath later by an army of lawyers. The legislation has to step up and protect society and work made by humans. A US Federal court already determined that AI-generated works cannot be copyrighted. In my opinion, training data has to be obtained with legal permission and with proper compensation to the original authors of the work that is used to train AI models. The AI companies have said that they can't operate in this way because it would be too slow and expensive and justify their actions by others doing it if they don't, and US companies being left behind in the competition if they don't do it. If the courts indeed allow this accepted practice then basically humans will have no work and no money in the future. The money for the work will go to the owners of the AI models and they will never give up their financial advantage over the common people (who created the work that was used to make the AI models and were used to filter the garbage out from the teaching material for extremely low pay). This will lead to a massive increase in economic inequality and collapse of societies, if allowed to stand. There is no reason to allow it, of course, as the governments in democracies are responsible for the people rather than the companies let alone AI models.

[cpc]

There is a good case to be made that a big model does lossy compression on the training data. Plenty of science to back it up. No idea about the legal consequences of such an approach.

[maxJ4380]

Since the guy is already a billionaire, i doubt that right or fair is going to come into play. Especially when more millions / billions are at stake. There's no way he going to stand there and say, what would Jesus do ? 

It is kinda ironic through, the movie studio's have been tying up movie rights, soundtracks, copyright for decades and longer, now their crying foul. 

[Fatalfury]

Ai or not, the picture is far too similar to BR2049. It's a theft in my view.

[Davide DB]

On 10/30/2024 at 12:09 PM, Fatalfury said:

Ai or not, the picture is far too similar to BR2049. It's a theft in my view.

 

So I can't paint a picture copying the style of Picasso or Andy Warhol?

[MrSMW]

18 minutes ago, Davide DB said:

 

So I can't paint a picture copying the style of Picasso or Andy Warhol?

I believe you can as long as you don’t claim it’s by either of them.

Easy to copy these two as they were a bit shit.

[majoraxis]

"Discovery, for allegedly feeding stills from the movie into an AI image generator to create unauthorized promotional content."

"Alcon Entertainment claims in the lawsuit — filed in a U.S. District Court in Los Angeles — that the defendants used AI-generated images reminiscent of the 2017 film after Alcon denied a request to use footage for the October 10 event held at the Warner Bros."

It seems that if you don't feed the original content into your AI model after being denied the rights to use the footage, you would have a better chance of avoiding a lawsuit...

Kind of like when OpenAi asked Scarlett Johansson to license her voice and she said no and then they used a voice actor that sounded similar to her... OpenAi decided not to test the water after previewing the sound similar voice artist.

I bet if an artist would drawn/created/made and photographed a model of a dystopian cityscape in rust colored smog/fog, and fed it into AI as reference to generate their final image even if it look similar to BR2049, Tesla would have had a better case for not breaking copyright law.

It will be interesting to see the outcome of this case as maybe Tesla is intentionally pushing the limits on this to get a ruling that might favor AI generating content in regards to referencing copyrighted content...

Also, we haven't seen the prompt - what if it was: "Red orange fog all around. we see a young man from behind standing, in trench coat, staring at a dystopian cityscape in red-orange colored smog/fog with rocky landscape between him and the city skyline."

The image below was generate without any reference - I just used the above prompt ... warner brothers please sue imagine.art for using the flux model to generate this rather than me... Will using certain prompts get people sued?  It makes me wonder....

[majoraxis]

The above image is for educational purposed only... do not distribute.

[Fatalfury]

21 hours ago, Davide DB said:

 

So I can't paint a picture copying the style of Picasso or Andy Warhol?

Completely different scenario.