• FlowVoid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    4 days ago

    You can prove it through discovery, ie force the AI developers to reveal all the songs they used to train their AI.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Well I’m not defending this, but that isn’t how crimes are prosecuted, thankfully. Prosecution is obligated to prove their case with evidence.

          Like, they have to prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) that you were at the crime scene and committed the act.

          Edit Indeed of someone DOES have some sort of evidence you committed the crime and you offer no rebuttal, then you’re hosed

          • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            This isn’t a prosecution, and nobody is alleging a crime. This is a civil lawsuit.

            In a civil lawsuit, the standard of evidence is much different. You do not have to “prove” things beyond a reasonable doubt like in a criminal trial. The jury is instructed to weigh the evidence like a balance, and whichever side has the best evidence wins. Even if it’s only a small difference that only slightly favors one side, they win.

            That’s why it’s so important to have evidence that counters whatever the other side claims. You are bound to lose if your opponents are the only ones offering evidence on their side of the balance.

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 days ago

              Agree. I believe I acknowledged that in my last sentence.

              My point is a frivolous claim is a thing , and someone bringing a claim must suffice a basic level of evidence to even proceed. Indeed, as you say, “judgement” is at a lower final standard in a civil suit.

              • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                I don’t think this is frivolous. If you publish a song that includes part of my song, that’s good evidence that you copied my song.

                • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 days ago

                  Well, disagree but that’s fine

                  I think proving the actual content is present in the song is more challenging, then it gets into the murk of “inspired by/influenced by” etc

                  In the end, these groups probably did edit literally include the songs in the training set, and are in violation.

        • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Huh? That would be the point of not keeping logs of the inputs and outputs and any process in between

          • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            If you don’t keep logs, and someone has evidence you did something wrong, then there won’t be any opposing evidence that you were in the right. So the jury will start out siding against you, and you won’t have any way to win them back.

            In fact if a judge thinks you didn’t keep logs because you were afraid they would incriminate you, then they will tell the jury to consider the lack of logs as further evidence against you.