Quote from: Neenyah on July 04, 2023, 11:50:48

Quote from: Codrut Nistor on July 04, 2023, 07:13:52Not simping fo AI, thinking about small game makers who are using it to speed up the process and would be willing to settle copyright matters when contacted by the owners of the copyright. I don't see why a copyright owner should contact Valve instead of the game makers directly...

Wait, so basically - first steal the content to use with AI without any permission, then ask for copyright rights if required (by Valve now) and only if the creators contact you game maker? How is that benefiting the original creators of the content or anyone but thieves (game devs) who stole it?

Also let's say you create some content, some "small game makers" just take it for their game to use it with AI, how exactly will you be able to know that without literally playing that particular game? So they are making money on YOUR content and you are getting absolutely nothing in return. And you are ok with that because we have to think about small game makers? (but fu*k original authors of the content?) 🤨

And let's not forget that many of those devs (same as AI "artists") just ignore original authors altogether and make jokes about them how they are obsolete now because "AI is the future", lol.

Can you take into account that at least some devs simply don't think about this part, considering/hoping that the team behind the AI database has already handled the copyright issues? Some might be stealing and aware of it, but there must be others as well.

It's an understandable move. There's a lot of possible drama on the copyright front in the future. It's important to note, however, that this isn't a defense of "artists" (who, in reality, encompass various types of craftsmen), but rather a defense of Valve itself. In practice, this would probably lead to companies like Adobe paying 30 to 40 people for a stylization training dataset, while sourcing everything else directly from content clearly labeled as public domain. This would effectively clear copyright concerns for everyone. As for the notion of "copyright" right now, the idea itself of how it actually works in images isn't as settled as in music. In music, melodies and samples are copyrighted, but styles and imitation aren't. As someone who spent 5.5 years studying art history, I would say that while "AI" is not the future (simply because it's a meaningless buzzword), machine learning is. As a supplement to human intentions, not a replacement. So, the questions of the day are: how much human intention is required, how on earth can we vet a model training dataset (it's practically impossible on publishers end), and to what extent can we infringe upon someone else's "style"? We'll see how they figure out all the details de jure.

p.s. grammar corrected by gpt-4 :3

Quote from: Codrut Nistor on July 04, 2023, 07:13:52Not simping fo AI, thinking about small game makers who are using it to speed up the process and would be willing to settle copyright matters when contacted by the owners of the copyright. I don't see why a copyright owner should contact Valve instead of the game makers directly...

Wait, so basically - first steal the content to use with AI without any permission, then ask for copyright rights if required (by Valve now) and only if the creators contact you game maker? How is that benefiting the original creators of the content or anyone but thieves (game devs) who stole it?

Also let's say you create some content, some "small game makers" just take it for their game to use it with AI, how exactly will you be able to know that without literally playing that particular game? So they are making money on YOUR content and you are getting absolutely nothing in return. And you are ok with that because we have to think about small game makers? (but fu*k original authors of the content?) 🤨

And let's not forget that many of those devs (same as AI "artists") just ignore original authors altogether and make jokes about them how they are obsolete now because "AI is the future", lol.

Quote from: hugh mungus on July 03, 2023, 18:59:33

Quote from: Codrut Nistor on July 03, 2023, 13:08:38

Quote from: Neenyah on July 03, 2023, 11:40:29Kudos to Valve, nice move.

You think??? Maybe it would have been better for Valve to leave the games alone for now. After all, copyright owners could get in touch with the makers of these games and talk it out. In the end, it's the gaming community that loses the most with Valve's move.

lol no

Valve could get hit by lawsuits if was publishing games on its storefront that used AI produced assets derived from other works. Quit simping for AI. Actual gamers don't care for it. Humans have a bad enough time already making buggy, unoptimized games. AI would just be worse at that.

Not simping fo AI, thinking about small game makers who are using it to speed up the process and would be willing to settle copyright matters when contacted by the owners of the copyright. I don't see why a copyright owner should contact Valve instead of the game makers directly...

I don't even need to read the article to know that a Microsoft game will not be imperiled. Valve's policies are selective.

Quote from: Codrut Nistor on July 03, 2023, 13:08:38

Quote from: Neenyah on July 03, 2023, 11:40:29Kudos to Valve, nice move.

You think??? Maybe it would have been better for Valve to leave the games alone for now. After all, copyright owners could get in touch with the makers of these games and talk it out. In the end, it's the gaming community that loses the most with Valve's move.

lol no

Valve could get hit by lawsuits if was publishing games on its storefront that used AI produced assets derived from other works. Quit simping for AI. Actual gamers don't care for it. Humans have a bad enough time already making buggy, unoptimized games. AI would just be worse at that.

Quote from: Codrut Nistor on July 03, 2023, 13:08:38You think??? Maybe it would have been better for Valve to leave the games alone for now. After all, copyright owners could get in touch with the makers of these games and talk it out. In the end, it's the gaming community that loses the most with Valve's move.

Yes I think. They can end in a sh*tload of problems with copyright lawsuits and they are doing the right thing here with:

QuoteThe company claims that developers need to demonstrate they have the necessary copyright clearances to use the material.

So give proofs of copyright and there is no problems. If Valve allows it knowingly by simply ignoring the issue of copyright and pretending that they are the only people in the world unaware of what's going on with that matter then they would be no different from various shady torrent sites, no? Do they really need to gamble and risk potential huge problems of any kind when they can simply prevent that by asking developers to prove their right to use the AI material? If devs can't prove it that says more about them than about Valve so yes, in my book Valve is doing a great thing here.

Quote from: Neenyah on July 03, 2023, 11:40:29Kudos to Valve, nice move.

You think??? Maybe it would have been better for Valve to leave the games alone for now. After all, copyright owners could get in touch with the makers of these games and talk it out. In the end, it's the gaming community that loses the most with Valve's move.

Kudos to Valve, nice move.