[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Proposal -- Interpretation of DFSG on Artificial Intelligence (AI) Models





On Sun, 4 May 2025 at 17:30, Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> wrote:
>    Wikipedia definition is a layman's simplification.

It may be a simplification, but that in and of itself does not make it
incorrect.

I have specifically addressed this point with examples in my reply. Copyright very clearly does not survive learning and then generation of new solutions. In humans that is a given. For software I would assume the equivalence, unless proven differently.

If we decide to ignore this as Debian, then we all need to upload all *our* training data - all lectures from university, all highschool classes and books, all training manuals we have ever read.

Learning is not a trivial transformation from source to output. Not in humans and also not in sufficiently advanced AI software. And learning has never been considered to be a source of a derivative work. Why should it start now?

This change in thinking Is what I want to communicate - learning is not a compilation. Just because a file comes in and a file comes out does not make the processes inside equivalent.

--
Best regards,
    Aigars Mahinovs

Reply to: