Post #1473874
2026-03-02 18:32 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 2026-03-02 19:12
He can copyright his software then? That's like saying that if I create a computer game where the computer also plays, I own the copyright to every single game played by the computer. It's just dumb. They stole the artwork that it was trained on, so move along thief.
-
@XLE@piefed.social 2026-03-02 19:02
Is there any literature that actually says DABUS exists? Everything I see online is talking about the spectacle of Stephen Thaler claiming it made something - and trying to patent it in several different countries across multiple continents - not how (or if) DABUS exists or functions. DABUS stands for "Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience," which sounds... suspicious.
-
@grue@lemmy.world 2026-03-02 20:35
In other words, it's not that *he* as the human operating the "AI" is trying to claim copyright in his own name, it's that he's trying to set a precedent where the "AI" can hold copyright in *its own* name. He's trying to pretend that his glorified pile of statistics is sentient, and get it legally recognized as such. 🤡
-
@Rekall_Incorporated@piefed.social 2026-03-02 18:41
It sounds like he has way too much money and time on his hands.
-
@WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 2026-03-02 20:50
AI is legally the same as a printing press. It's not the guy that designs and runs the press that owns what comes out of it. And what goes into the AI is large volumes of other people's work, turned into confetti and glued together into something not quite new.