Disney is no stranger to hypocracy of that sort. Look at them making their billions off of the public domain (Snow White, Cinderella, Aladin, The Little Mermaid, need I go on?) while lobbying heavily for longer copyright terms to keep works they made from being similarly adapted.
this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
62 points (95.6% liked)
Technology
72323 readers
2655 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
*hipocrisy
*hippochrissy
*hippopotamus
I'm so tired of hearing about "AI- this," and "AI-that"
Just use the tool where appropriate and stop treating it like a panacea
Looks like we'll have to support Midjourney
Honestly, I find it ridiculous that companies like Disney want to claim ownership over the data used to train AI models. Training data isn’t duplication, it’s learning. The same way humans study, reference, and reinterpret. Trying to monetize every aspect of “influence” is a slippery slope that stifles innovation just to protect legacy revenue streams.
This isn't about fairness, it's about control. And the more these companies try to dominate every avenue of cultural expression, the more irrelevant they risk becoming.
Artificial neural networks are simple versions of the neurons arranged in a brain. It's a useful solution when you know what the output should be but you don't know what algorithm would produce it from a desired input. To claim "AI" is learning the same way as complex human brains seems a bit farfetched. If you want to say human brains are ultimately just an algorithm then fine, but look at the outputs between the two.
AI art may not look like duplication but it often looks like derived-work which could trigger copyright infringement (to my non-artist eyes). AI code on the other hand looks much closer to duplication to me and it doesn't seem right they can use other's code to produce code while ignoring the license because the algorithm had "learned like a human". Many software licenses are there to protect users, rather than monopolize, and get totally ignored for profit.
"Innovative" these days seems to means new ways to fuck-over users, rather than the past where it meant products got better and/or cheaper.