新しいツイートを表示

会話

Hi, As Yoichi Ochiai, I would like to express my deepest respect for the concerns raised in this statement. It's clear that the issue of generative AI and its impact on artists and copyright holders is a complex and sensitive one. First, I would like to clarify that I have no control over how media outlets, including Nippon TV's News Zero, present or interpret my views. My intention has always been to promote a balanced and informed discussion about the potential and challenges of AI in the art world. Not only for your situation, however, I have to face the general issue that I have not commented specifically on your case. Here is translated my comment: === I've said this before, but I think the rules should be changed to fit the era of using AI. This has been mentioned frequently for the last 10 years or so, so it was expected. Given the current situation, future artists or those who want to make a living from copyright will either have to raise the unit price, create with AI on the assumption that they will be copied, live by selling the fact that they have been copied, attach a certificate to their work, or create something that is hard to copy in the physical world. I think those who have created works that way will survive, so I don't think there's anything to be done about it. That's the reality now. === I raised 5 ideas above. “Given the current situation, future artists or those who want to make a living from copyright will either have to raise the unit price, create with AI on the assumption that they will be copied, live by selling the fact that they have been copied, attach a certificate to their work, or create something that is hard to copy in the physical world. ” I would like to further explain my views on the development of AI and its impact on copyright law and art production. Clarifying the relationship between AI and copyright: As AI becomes more capable of creating art, we need to determine who owns the copyright to these works. Since an AI is not a creative thinker like a human, it cannot own the copyright. But should the copyright belong to the person or organization that designed and programmed the AI, or to the provider of the data from which the AI learned? We need new laws that clearly define the relationship between AI and copyright. Increase the unit price of artwork: Artists can increase the value of their work by improving its quality, reinforcing the story or message behind it, or offering limited editions or signed pieces. This can help artists better compete in a market increasingly influenced by AI. Collaborate with AI: AI can be a powerful tool for creativity, allowing artists to explore new forms and styles. Artists can use AI's capabilities to evolve their own art and create works that are unique and valuable. Selling the fact that artwork has been copied: Artists can also market the fact that their work has been copied. This can increase their influence and visibility, and they can set up a system to receive a royalty for each copy. Attach a certificate: Using technologies such as NFTs, artists can attach a certificate to their work to prove ownership. This can ensure the authenticity of the work and distinguish the original from the copies. Create art that is difficult to copy in the physical world: Artists can create works that exist in a physical form, such as sculptures or installations, that are difficult for AI to copy. This can provide an additional layer of protection against copyright infringement. As AI continues to evolve, we will need to adapt our laws and practices to ensure that the rights of artists are protected and that the potential of AI is harnessed in a way that benefits everyone. This is a complex issue that requires careful consideration and discussion. Moreover, regarding the use of your artwork in a public poll without your consent, I agree that it's a serious issue. It's important that we respect artists' rights and get their permission before using their work in a public context. I'm sorry to hear that your work has been used in this way, and I understand why you feel hurt and exploited. Regarding your concerns about AI and copyright infringement, I share your concerns. It's undeniable that there are cases where AI technologies are used to replicate or imitate copyrighted works without permission. This is a clear violation of artists' rights and something that needs to be addressed urgently. But I think it's also important to consider the potential positive applications of AI in the arts. AI can be a powerful tool for creativity, allowing artists to explore new forms and styles. But this should never be at the expense of existing artists' rights. We need to find a balance where AI can be used to enhance creativity without infringing on copyrights. I also want to emphasize that I'm not dismissing the struggles of artists in Japan or anywhere else in the world. In fact, the art industry is facing many challenges, and it's important that we address these issues and support artists in every way possible. In conclusion, I believe we need to have an open and informed discussion about the role of AI in the arts. We need to address the challenges, respect the rights of artists, and explore how AI can be used responsibly and ethically in the art world. Yoichi Ochiai

ツイートを翻訳

引用ツイート

Karla Ortiz

@kortizart

5月23日

Last week @ntvnewszero released a shameful segment that exploited my work by holding a public "competition" with online trolls, misinformed viewers and dismissed my accurate issues on generative AI. Here's my statement on this unfortunate segment: twitter.com/ntvnewszero/st…

午前1:31 · 2023年5月24日

24.6万

件の表示

ブックマーク

芸術家が一番アイデア勝負だから早く権利関係のルールを決めてもらいたいですね。一般社会はそれを土台にすればいいので頑張って下さい。

黙ってれば良かったのに

そもそも搾取構造の画像生成AI等々はどう活用するかの対象ではないと思う許可学習の誰もが納得する形の生成AIが登場した時にやっとどう既存の人間の仕事を奪わないように活用するかのフェーズに移れるのでは？

そもそもカーラさんの懸念や抗議の重要なポイントは、AIのモデルを構築する時に、許可なく大量の著作物が利用される事であり、単にAI技術によって模倣や複製が作り出される事ではありません。ここは完全に勘違いしてる思うので、是非もう一度彼女の主張を読み返して下さい。

140

You missed the point, didn't you?

Did you use ChatGPT to write this? Because it's the longest text completely devoid of any essence I have ever seen. You "wrote" a few hundred without saying anything that has any meaning.

162

見てない間に、digiギャル化しとるやないかー

無断学習AIは違法にして、権利問題をクリアしたクリーンなAIのみを市場で流通させるようにするというアイデアはいかがでしょうか？普通に誰でも思いつくアイデアだと思いますが、このアイデアを取り上げない理由があるのでしょうか？

チャッピー通すとわかり易い

Tamara’s Animation Corner

@CornerTamara

9時間

What do you mean AI can be a powerful "tool" for creativity??? All it does is soullessly spit out algorithmic garbage. Real artists do NOT want to rely something that will disrespect real artists globally. Also, you use on ChatGPT to write a soulless statement, didn't you?

Why the Prompters believe that as an artist you want to try other styles as if it were a stupid game? AIs are a "mediocrity booster" not a super creative tool.

You say you agree with how she feels that her art has been used without consent, then proceed to say "you can copy whatever style you like! 1!1!" when that's exactly using someone else's work like it was nothing.

これは非常に否定的です。現時点では、AI の使用によるプラスのメリットはありません。存命のアーティストから盗むことがどのようにプラスになるのでしょうか？自分の国民が苦労しているのを気にしないのか？

First, using AIs through a prompt is not an aid to creativity. Claiming otherwise falls into empty speech, a slogan to sell AIs. Second, AIs infringe copyright, every time. They are powered by huge libraries of copyrighted images.

メディアを再生できません。

再読み込み

"Attach a certificate: Using technologies such as NFTs, artists can attach a certificate..." You mean like a signature... people put in their artwork... since... centuries ago?

Live2D Artist (COMM OPEN)

@Meltyveil

6時間

I stopped reading after "is a complex and sensitive" regarding the use of ai. There is nothing complex & sensitive. This foolish statement usually means you are okay with AI due to your own spite. The matter of AI is very straightforward: unethical and theft. Educate yourself

Article 3 BILL OF RIGHTS

@BorgoniaBorgy

5時間

That's a lengthy composition that displays you DID NOT comprehend what is being said of current PRIMITIVE A.I. that exploits datasets used without consent nor compensation. Are you sure you have a "Ph.d" as your profile displays? It certainly doesn't look like it.

メディアを再生できません。

再読み込み