Raw LLM Responses

@josehumdinger6872 I'm no expert on Copy Right law, so I wont comment to much on it. However, in the court cases I have researched generally you cannot copyright a style of art. Is it morally correct to blatantly rip an artists style off? Personally I think it is wrong. Generally speaking, at the current moment, there are 2 main ways of using AI to create images. 1) A pure text prompt 2) A text prompt and sample image If you are using a pure text prompt, an image is being generated via the AI's processes using what is called Latent image data (the meta data pulled from the training set of images), and a tokenized version of the text prompt. Essentially what you typed is being parsed from a raw String into a computer readable token set. The IA then uses what it has learned to create a new image based on the token input. Also, generally some sudo random seeds are used via cryptographic algorithms to make sure that every image generated is different. So if you type "dog with hat" you dont get the same image twice. This process does not involve ANY of the images in the training set, and hence isn't violating any type of copyright. The second method is when issues can arise. It is possibly and most likely illegal to feed someone else's art into the AI and then change it using a text prompt and latent image data. But the legal burden in that case is 100% on the user abusing the tech and the copyright theft is not being done by the training process, it's being done by the thief. Also, typing an arts name directly using text prompt is also sketchy in my opinion and I don't support it. The main issue is artists don't understand the nuances of the technology and how it works. Sitting here and saying that all AI art is stealing is just plain incorrect, and most of what this YouTuber said is misinformation. No images from these data sets are distributed with the end product and if it did, it's not real AI. That would be considered an image composite generator (that may not be the official term).