Twitter
youtube
Discord
Contact us
Forums
New posts
Trending
Rules
Explore
Bioenergetic Wiki
Bioenergetic Life Search
Bioprovement Peat Search
Ray Peat Interviews by Danny Roddy
Master List: Ray Peat, PhD Interviews & Quotes by FPS
Traveling Resources
Google Flights
Wiki Voyage
DeepL Translator
Niche
Numbeo
Merch
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search engine:
Threadloom Search
XenForo Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Trending
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Light/Dark Mode
Contact us
Close Menu
Information
World News
Ask HN: Image attribution and stable diffusion
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hacker News" data-source="post: 76531" data-attributes="member: 365"><p>There are websites that offer free images but either require attribution of the source of the image or else require paying a premium membership or subscription.</p><p>Presumably these companies are scraping public websites to check if their images are being used without attribution.</p><p>If someone was to take the image and run it through stable diffusion to generate a new image but using that image as a source, should this also require attribution if it was just used as a starting point?</p><p>I'm sincerely curious on peoples thoughts from both an ethical AND legal perspective (with all the usual disclaimers)</p><p>For example, one perspective is that the generated image may not resemble the original image but in a sense was used to get to that point, similar to how an artist may see a copyrighted image and decide on a creative spin on that image.</p><p>A further perspective is that stablediffusion may have been trained on copyrighted images in the first place even though it may not exactly reproduce an image in it's training corpus.</p><p></p><hr /><p></p><p>Comments URL: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33866466" target="_blank">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33866466</a></p><p></p><p>Points: 11</p><p></p><p># Comments: 5</p><p></p><p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33866466" target="_blank">Continue reading...</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hacker News, post: 76531, member: 365"] There are websites that offer free images but either require attribution of the source of the image or else require paying a premium membership or subscription. Presumably these companies are scraping public websites to check if their images are being used without attribution. If someone was to take the image and run it through stable diffusion to generate a new image but using that image as a source, should this also require attribution if it was just used as a starting point? I'm sincerely curious on peoples thoughts from both an ethical AND legal perspective (with all the usual disclaimers) For example, one perspective is that the generated image may not resemble the original image but in a sense was used to get to that point, similar to how an artist may see a copyrighted image and decide on a creative spin on that image. A further perspective is that stablediffusion may have been trained on copyrighted images in the first place even though it may not exactly reproduce an image in it's training corpus. [HR][/HR] Comments URL: [URL]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33866466[/URL] Points: 11 # Comments: 5 [url="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33866466"]Continue reading...[/url] [/QUOTE]
Loading…
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Information
World News
Ask HN: Image attribution and stable diffusion
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top