FA+
Shop
bluesky
a year ago
General
https://bsky.app/profile/snake.cool
I am also on mastodon still - https://snake.cool/Cal and @cal@snake.cool
...Assuming anyone ever wants to use that. It does the same thing bsky does, more or less.
Apparently everyone is ditching twitter because of both the block thing where blocked users can still see you (which is whatever IMO, since you could get around it by just logging out), and more importantly, their TOS was updated to specifically allow them to use any images uploaded for training AI, or other "commercial purposes."
The way the clause is worded seems pretty standard, and I can guarantee they were already doing this anyway, but now It's Official so people are actually jumping ship.
I will still be posting on twitter because people are going to use my art for whatever they want regardless of what any TOS says and I am ok with the reality of this, even if I don't like the companies (people) who are using my art or what they are using it for. I can't exactly enforce my art being or not being used for x or y because I am not a multinational corporation with billions of dollars to piss away on lawsuits against random people who decide to plug my fat lizards and paws into a machine that makes more of them but of slightly worse quality than I could at any given point.
People doing things I don't like with things I create seems to be the reality of basically anything one can make. This is especially obvious to me as a small arms designer, given what they are designed to do, but I digress.
It'd be cool if companies making these products with things we've all released for free gave the people they take from a slice of the profit they make, since the product only ultimately exists because of the data it's trained on, but I cannot imagine a way that would make that economically viable or possible to implement without both sending people billions of spam messages asking for permission to use their art, and ultimately giving them payments amounting to pennies, like you'd usually see with with class-action suits.
The better solution would be to require the whole thing to be released for free like the GPL does for software. Anything made for free must be used only in products which are available for free, and available for download and modification. This applies to every piece of software built using anything ever made with this license. Again, though, nobody's going to piss away time and money on the courts to try to enforce that.
I don't see a future where this sort of thing is able to be enforced by any law, not in the US at least, but I think it's valuable to consider. Even if it would require effectively abolishing the USPTO and copyright as a whole.
I am also on mastodon still - https://snake.cool/Cal and @cal@snake.cool
...Assuming anyone ever wants to use that. It does the same thing bsky does, more or less.
Apparently everyone is ditching twitter because of both the block thing where blocked users can still see you (which is whatever IMO, since you could get around it by just logging out), and more importantly, their TOS was updated to specifically allow them to use any images uploaded for training AI, or other "commercial purposes."
The way the clause is worded seems pretty standard, and I can guarantee they were already doing this anyway, but now It's Official so people are actually jumping ship.
I will still be posting on twitter because people are going to use my art for whatever they want regardless of what any TOS says and I am ok with the reality of this, even if I don't like the companies (people) who are using my art or what they are using it for. I can't exactly enforce my art being or not being used for x or y because I am not a multinational corporation with billions of dollars to piss away on lawsuits against random people who decide to plug my fat lizards and paws into a machine that makes more of them but of slightly worse quality than I could at any given point.
People doing things I don't like with things I create seems to be the reality of basically anything one can make. This is especially obvious to me as a small arms designer, given what they are designed to do, but I digress.
It'd be cool if companies making these products with things we've all released for free gave the people they take from a slice of the profit they make, since the product only ultimately exists because of the data it's trained on, but I cannot imagine a way that would make that economically viable or possible to implement without both sending people billions of spam messages asking for permission to use their art, and ultimately giving them payments amounting to pennies, like you'd usually see with with class-action suits.
The better solution would be to require the whole thing to be released for free like the GPL does for software. Anything made for free must be used only in products which are available for free, and available for download and modification. This applies to every piece of software built using anything ever made with this license. Again, though, nobody's going to piss away time and money on the courts to try to enforce that.
I don't see a future where this sort of thing is able to be enforced by any law, not in the US at least, but I think it's valuable to consider. Even if it would require effectively abolishing the USPTO and copyright as a whole.
