LAION demands money from photographer who requested removal of photos
petapixel.com
petapixel.com
So, the Pirate Bay defense?
(Conversely, if this isn't applicable, does this mean that providing protected content in compressed form, say, as a zip archive, is also exempt? In a sense, it's yet another model with an output probability of 1.0.)
OK, so they're legally entitled to throw this back into the faces of whoever makes these kind of requests.
Still - it does seem rather petty. Common sense (and basic decency) would tell us to take a less knee-jerk approach. A simple form letter (explaining the lack of legal merit to their claim) should suffice to quell at least 80 percent of these claims. If the claimant persists, then yeah, you could thrown down the gauntlet like this.
Otherwise, it comes off as rather haughty and aggressive (and as the Germans would say, zickig) to breathe acid at (apparently simply uninformed) claimants like these.
The bigger point is that in all probability, the client's costs were minor (<10k), and these kinds of bumps and scrapes that happen (and what one needs to budget for) when choosing to to push forward with a large-scale and obviously controversial project.
So discretion (and concern for the project's overall public image) would call for using a feather rather than a sledgehammer here, as I see it.
Your figure of "<10k" that you consider as "minor" shows that you have no idea how people get by. They were kind enough to explain in advance how they would proceed if the complainant pursued in their misguided attack, how more agreeable do you want them to be without similar complaints drowning them out?
So when I said "minor" not in comparison to his day job salary but as in, you know, the scheme of things.
You have no idea how people get by.
Gosh, it seems you know everything about me.
AI used photographer’s photos for training, then slapped him with an invoice - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35712131 - April 2023 (144 comments)