this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
41 points (72.5% liked)

Technology

70285 readers
3511 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MCasq_qsaCJ_234@lemmy.zip 24 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Japan's Copyright Act, amended in 2019, is largely interpreted as allowing the use of copyrighted materials to train AI tools — without the consent of the copyright holder. The law, specifically more permissive than those in the EU or the US, aims to attract AI investors to the Asian country.

It's actually strange that Japan allows this because that country normally has very strict copyright laws compared to the EU and the United States.

Charlie Fink, former Disney producer and current adjunct professor of cinematic AI at Chapman University, feels that the use of the rapidly developing tech will "lead to a new golden age of Hollywood," one that would be "highly democratized, because an individual could make a film for a few thousand dollars," he told DW

If Fink is right in what he says, in the future, I think there will be a debate about whether AI is a good thing or a bad thing. Because if AI makes cinema a movement like free software and/or open source, it's a win-win, right?

[–] Loduz_247@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

As long as the AI ​​is also Free Software or Open Source.

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

sounds like japan might be desperate for the lack of anime workers.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Much of the animation takes place outside Japan these days. If you watch enough recent anime end credits, you'll see a lot of what look like romanized Vietnamese names. And there was a scandal . . . about a year ago now? . . . when some material for an anime then in production was found on the server of a North Korean studio (probably because a Chinese studio to which the anime had been outsourced then outsourced it further without paying attention to little things like international treaties). And I don't think the teams remaining in Japan have any shortage of recruits.

This issue, as with any business, is "can AI produce more for cheaper at an acceptable quality?" If it does make real inroads, it'll be the outsourcing studios doing the less-important scenes that get replaced first.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The whole "they need to get permission!" thing makes no sense. When I watch an MKBHD video I don't need to get his permission to learn from him. I don't need his permission to learn from his style. I don't need permission from an artist to learn from their art style, their brush stroke technique, their colour science. I just look at it, watch it, read about it, and I learn. I can then use what I learned to make new stuff and there is nothing that they can, or should be able, to do about it.

The same applies for AI. AI isn't recreating the material that it is trained from - it's "learning" from it. It doesn't take the Mona Lisa as training material and then output the Mona Lisa.

[–] FarceOfWill@infosec.pub 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

It does recreate the training material. There's literally loads of examples of it spitting out a degraded copy of an original pi CE of art with specific enough terms.

[–] IsaamoonKHGDT_6143@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

But that is already the fault of the person who gave those instructions to the AI.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 1 day ago

But You don’t know what it was trained on, so you can’t say that with any certainty. If it was, why would it make a degraded copy? If it was trained on the real thing, shouldn’t it replicate the real thing perfectly?