According to Cleg, the only viable solution to tension between artists and AI companies would be to provide ways to get out of training to artists, which Stability AI began to do specifically In 2022.
“Say enough sounds, ‘you can only train on my content, [if you] Ask first, “” Cleg said. ” And I have to say that I am considered to be somewhat unacceptable because these systems train on a wide range of data. “
On the X, a well-trained-a non-profit CEO who supports the fight against artists’ non-controversial AI training. Post Looking through thousands.
“It is wrong to say that the demands of the artists on Nick Clegg AI and copyright are wrong,” said Newton Rex. “She could have been equally made about every argument Neptster:” First, she “tech is there,” secondly, “the licensing takes time,” and third, “We can’t overcome the tasks of other countries.” Newton-Ricks wrote, “If the Neptster operations were not legal, then the training of AI firms,” ”These are not the reasons for keeping the law better and treating the creators.”
Other social media users made fun of the Clegg with the Cleg, which aims to eliminate the favorite argument of AI firms against copyright claims.
“Blackbayard says sailors will ‘kill piracy on the high sea industry’ to board the ship and ask permission to return to their ships,” an x user with a handle “Sianchak” Is written.
On Bluesky, a trial lawyer, Max Kenneri, effectively cleaned the Cleg and the entire AI industry. Write, “Our product produces such a low price that it is not merely viable in the market, not even as a niche product. Therefore, we should be allowed to unilaterally, from the work of others, to unilaterally, and to convert it into our profits.”