It could have big implications.
You know what's hysterically funny about this case?
It absolutely, utterly, totally demolishes the dumbest anti-AI arguments, the very same ones that Cory Doctorow already pointed out are full of shit.
Kneschke requested his photos be removed from the dataset but LAION denied holding copies of his photos saying it βonly maintains a database containing links to image files that are publicly available on the internetβ.
This is it, people. LAION just tracks publicly available images on the internet, which is even less than Pinterest does (as, need I remind you, Pinterest holds copies of other people's works without their knowledge, much less consent, to say nothing of link to the original version, credit or even, sometimes, the possibility of commenting where it came from), and I have yet to see any whiny Butlerian jihadi cunt complain about Pinterest "stealing people's work".
To compare: LAION makes a phonebook. Pinterest makes a deluxe, glossy paper coffee table book of full-page reproductions. This analogy won't be clearer.
In its decision, the court says that because LAION releases its dataset for free, it is considered non-commercial and for scientific research.
UP YOURS, FUCKFACE. Information wants to be free and all the Gettys of the world can't change this.
"Weak and contentious" like an absolute motherfuck.
