“Napster destroyed the business model of music” overstates the case. While I agree AI shouldn’t steal IP, obviously, there’s a distinction between piracy and AI training that can get lost.
The relationship between piracy and industry revenue is complex and contested. While some studies show impact, others suggest the effects are often overstated. Piracy frequently reflects service failure more than moral failing. When Netflix consolidated content (and ‘everything’ was on Netflix), piracy dropped. When content fragmented across dozens of streaming platforms, it surged again. That suggests piracy is a distribution problem, not just theft. (Also, music privacy is way way down since Spotify and Apple Music et al.)
AI training presents a different challenge. Unlike a fan downloading a movie they may or may not buy later, AI systems don’t consume media they digest it to generate new, (potentially competing) content at scale. That’s less like individual piracy and more like industrial-scale content laundering. (And very much not great… AI slop is everywhere…)
The music industry did change after Napster, but those shifts were driven by broader technological and market forces, not piracy alone. Even if no CD was ever pirated, we’d likely have Spotify now. It’s much more convenient. Further, we need a wider conversation about copyright reform. The current system allows corporations to basically indefinitely control modern myths and cultural icons, stifling (fan) culture and creative reinterpretation that have historically fueled storytelling and kept them relevant. (Just look at Star Wars and how corporate control limits fan creativity/joy/love despite that community keeping the franchise culturally relevant.)
The real issue isn’t whether a basement dweller generating Darth Vader images hurts Disney, it’s whether copyright law serves creativity or merely protects corporate profits. AI regulation should be part of broader copyright reform.
P.S. Calling these AIs “thinking machines” is generous…they’re prediction engines, not creative intelligences.
PPS. Diablo sounds good. I’ll check it out. Cheers!
“Napster destroyed the business model of music” overstates the case. While I agree AI shouldn’t steal IP, obviously, there’s a distinction between piracy and AI training that can get lost.
The relationship between piracy and industry revenue is complex and contested. While some studies show impact, others suggest the effects are often overstated. Piracy frequently reflects service failure more than moral failing. When Netflix consolidated content (and ‘everything’ was on Netflix), piracy dropped. When content fragmented across dozens of streaming platforms, it surged again. That suggests piracy is a distribution problem, not just theft. (Also, music privacy is way way down since Spotify and Apple Music et al.)
AI training presents a different challenge. Unlike a fan downloading a movie they may or may not buy later, AI systems don’t consume media they digest it to generate new, (potentially competing) content at scale. That’s less like individual piracy and more like industrial-scale content laundering. (And very much not great… AI slop is everywhere…)
The music industry did change after Napster, but those shifts were driven by broader technological and market forces, not piracy alone. Even if no CD was ever pirated, we’d likely have Spotify now. It’s much more convenient. Further, we need a wider conversation about copyright reform. The current system allows corporations to basically indefinitely control modern myths and cultural icons, stifling (fan) culture and creative reinterpretation that have historically fueled storytelling and kept them relevant. (Just look at Star Wars and how corporate control limits fan creativity/joy/love despite that community keeping the franchise culturally relevant.)
The real issue isn’t whether a basement dweller generating Darth Vader images hurts Disney, it’s whether copyright law serves creativity or merely protects corporate profits. AI regulation should be part of broader copyright reform.
P.S. Calling these AIs “thinking machines” is generous…they’re prediction engines, not creative intelligences.
PPS. Diablo sounds good. I’ll check it out. Cheers!