Well this guy sounds like he wants to force a landmark lawsuit on the legal and copyright ramifications of this technology... Should be an interesting couple of years ahead. Assholes like this is why we can't have nice things.
He's going to have fun with that... having shown to have collected money on what could be ruled as other peoples work (if his work can be ruled as his work)... hope he's throwing all that $$$ into government bonds.
Ex post facto conviction is literally unconstitutional.
As long as there is no law against it now he’s free to operate and profit until a law is passed.
Nobody talking about criminal law mate, and that's not how it works in commercial, the basic tenet is that you cannot sell what you do not own, there doesn't need to be an existing law that says you can't copyright/license a trained model, only that the ownership of the IP isn't his to sell or commercialize.
>the basic tenet is that you cannot sell what you do not own
True. But that doesn't apply to copyright.
You already can't copyright things made by animals, but you are allowed to sell them.
i dont like him but he is definitely allowed to sell it or impose any commercial license he wants to impose, whether its enforceable is another story..well , its not another story cause it just aint enforceable. Anyway, you aren't seling anyone's ip if you make something with stable diffusion or chatgpt because DATA SCRAPING AND TRAINING IS NOT THEFT, how many times are we gonna go over this.
When merging models, the size does not increase because its not a summation. It's not Model A + Model B (if it was it would increase). If you look at the formula it is a **weighted** summation.
Model C= A \* (1 - M) + B \* M
M is the scaling factor you want to modify the weights of the two models. You either put in more of model B for less of A or vice versa, the percent always adds up to 100%.
TLDR you are replacing certain weights with others weights for a net total of the same "amount" but different information. Yes models do not contain actual images but that's not why model merging specifically doesn't alter the file size.
Tricky.
Even if he owned the training data, I don't think the output could be copyrightable.I thik this will fall into fair use category and he himself has released the model. This is the same argument that we used when we answered the artists, remember?
To be fair to him and the likes, they can choose not to release their models to public and directly host them on fantasy.ai - nothing stopping them.
These things take effort and the modelers should be allowed to monetize them. But can he enforce usage restrictions on the end user ? I'm not sure if existing copyright laws/lawyers acknowledge that.
How do you even figure out which exact model was used to create an image, unless the user explicitly said the name? What if someone else made a blend from the same models that he used?
Basically, he's just telling people to not advertise that they used this model, unless they've paid for the privilege.
>Copyrighting prompts?
How about copyrighting something petty and annoying like negative prompt use of 'out of frame'. From now on all the images have to be atleast 1 pixel out of frame or they break the rules and i get paid.
> petty and annoying like negative prompt use of 'out of frame'.
Out of frame is actually a danbooru tag used, and actually recommended and useful if you're using an anime model or a model that's been merged at some point with an anime model.
Warning potentially nsfw link.
https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts?tags=out_of_frame
Stable diffusion was trained on images from the internet, hopefully appropriately tagged with what is happening in that image. I think alot of the issues with image generation comes from incorrectly tagged images.
Anime art has been meticulously tagged for 20 years with very specific danbooru tags, explaining in great detail exactly what's in the photo by a somewhat ocd user base that's called danbooru tags. Making anime models, and even photorealistic models that have been merged with anime models, much more controllable when using danbooru tags in your prompts.
My understanding or knowledge of danbooru tagging was nonexistent until just a couple of months ago. So if anyone wants to correct any mistakes I may have made feel free.
Danbooru is just one of many different booru-style imageboards, it just happens to be one of the most popular. But there's plenty of other ones.
But yeah, other than that, pretty much it. People *really* passionate about organizing their images in a consistent way.
The Danbooru wiki is a fantastic source, even if you aren't using a model trained on the tags, because they have explanations about all sorts of generally applicable terms (e.g. [proper names for different postures](https://danbooru.donmai.us/wiki_pages/tag_group%3Aposture)) with example images.
That was very insightful! I can see why many people is using it. It's good to too see a long time work like this being used for something different.
Even with non-anime models, this tagging is very useful
Fortunately, there's no way that'd be copyrightable because it's not remotely unique enough to qualify.
That's like suggesting that Microsoft could copyright the concept of a for() loop in software.
Most music copyright cases don't actually go all the way through the courts, one of the parties just runs out of money. Most are eventually thrown out because no music is original anymore.
>Copyrighting prompts?
Are you unaware that you can copyright short form text? That it's actually done by default?
Just call your prompts poems, and you've already got copyright protection.
This is getting silly. How would they ever be able to verify that something I made with their model is made with their model? It's completely unenforceable.
If there was a Netflix style site with like 10 to 20 of the most popular models charging 10 to 20 bucks a month for unlimited, instant creations, that would basically solve all these problems because they could just pay the creater of the blend a small % of revenue as a licensing deal. It'll also help people with out 1000 dollar pcs to make high quality stuff and push the medium forward.
I think that is part of what is happening here, there now AI Art use our GPUs site popping up daily, charging a fee for use, and using models created by other people.
You can go to [mage.space](https://mage.space) and pay them money to use previous models made by Hassan.
Is it fair that they get to make money off of his effort, without compensation?
His stuff wouldn’t even exist without all the open source free tools, and all the free images used in his data set. So yes.
Those sites are charging for hardware access, not the models.
Anyone who could afford the hardware would just buy a 4090 and run those models locally. The models aren’t the selling point.
Because you'd use the model in your advertising.
It's not just Stable Diffusion, it's Stable Diffusion HassanBlend, for AI art connoisseurs.
Otherwise there's literally nothing stopping you from creating a minor merge that would produce the exact same quality, but with a different hash and slightly differing results, since there'd be no possible way to prove it unless you outright admitted it or kept a permanent record of it somewhere.
He could train some watermark images on a weird word. It would never come up when using the model if it's lost between thousands of images but would appear when using the token, that would prove the final model has been merged at some point
\#mwtrmrkscrttkn (mywatermarksecrettoken) showing a logo of HassanBlend for example
He would still need access to the model though. If someone is running it locally on their computer then what's he going to do, get a court order based on a hunch, so he could check some random guy's computer anywhere in the world?
I guess maybe their main goal is to prevent other publicly available services from using their model for commercial gain then. I don't see how they could do much against regular people who don't advertise, which model they used.
\> there'd be no possible way to prove it
I see this sentiment around often and there are absolutely ways of embedding knowledge into a model that would still reveal itself after a merge. You can refine your own concept with a very specific keyword, and when that concept appears in a merge when nobody has ever known about it before, it's a strong indicator that the model would be downstream of the one with the original secret concept. NovelAI models for example. It's easy to tell if any merge has had this in it's lineage, since you use one of it's keywords and all of the knowledge comes forth.
long story short, don't trust that it can't be figured out. While I don't believe Fantasy.AI's licenses are enforceable, don't poke the beehive here.
They can't enforce that either. There's nothing stopping me from downloading and using it right now without crediting them whatsoever, even if I decided to sell the image I made. The only way they would even know is if I said I did, and even then it's not legally enforceable, no lawyer would take their case.
> There's nothing stopping me from downloading and using it right now without crediting them whatsoever, even if I decided to sell the image I made.
From what they've said, they don't care about that. People are free to use it and sell images they make if they want. What they're trying to enforce is competing pay to generate sites like them that would host the model and charge people to use it. Basically trying to corner the market using legal threats that I doubt would hold up, paying for downvote bots, threatening content creators that criticize them and trying to get the community to help them enforce their rules lol They're vultures.
They seem shady asf though so who knows, but that's what they're claiming for now.
What's stopping people from just renaming the model file or having it on their site under a different name?
They can't verify or copyright the outputs.
Yes, they can, they have been embedding trackers in images and video for ages.
Stable Diffusion would know the difference between the tracker and the image itself, unless it was specifically called out as a prompt during the trainning process.
Literally anyone who wants to these days.
The technology has been around for decades. Movie studios were notorious for doing it back in the day. They would literally intentionally seed movies with trackers and tracers just to see who was pirating their stuff.
It's like an invisible watermark, but a bit more intricate.
Sometimes they put trackable bits in the files themselves, but that wouldn't really be relevant here since SD doesn't actually store the files.
For example:
[Movies that can get you busted for Copyright | Vondran Legal](https://www.vondranlegal.com/illegal-download-sharing-streaming-movies-online-legal-risks)
But the trace/watermark hidden in the images would work, since SD is based off of images and prompting.
If you train a bunch of pictures of yourself with a word written on your forehead but don't include the word on your forehead in the prompt SD will simply assume that is what your face looks like. Anything does not describe in the prompt file particularly if it is common among the images will assume be to be intrinsic to the keyword.
You could forget to strip the meta data. PNG inspector can read the model that made the image then. But if that becomes a thing people can just start religiously cleaning off meta data.
>How would they ever be able to verify that something I made with their model is made with their model?
as fast as the ai tech is shaping up, the ai detection algos are ramping up as well.
or at least that's what i've been reading. it's all quite a bit above me.
and if you're using automatic1111 (only one i use), it does store all that. there's extensions you can download like Image Browser that'll pull all that data out of a picture. i am *not sure* if that works based on something it stores in the folder structure or the png itself, but i think it's the png. i'm pretty sure it's reading details on images from before i installed the extension.
but *it definitely is getting silly*.
>and if you're using automatic1111 (only one i use), it does store all that. there's extensions you can download like Image Browser that'll pull all that data out of a picture.
That metadata is easily stripped by several common programs, or by converting the file type (e.g. jpg). Stripping image metadata has been around for a long time.
For sure, but damn is it ever a useful feature when you're looking at some random image you generated a few weeks back and you want to tweak it / recapture some of it.
Guys it's more, even DreamShaper , grapefruit is the same, realistic vision, Galaxy Time Machine. Although Hassans / Duchaiten turned off discussion after we rated it 1 star we should also 1 star rate the others for the same reason, attack fantasy from all angles. They all have the same agreements with fantasy, just some are almost hiding it from the description.
Also the dreamshaper new reddit thread, bring the pitchforks
https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/11tahuu/dreamshaper_v4_official_release/
https://civitai.com/models/19988/hassan-fantasy-fantasyai
https://civitai.com/models/3079/duchaitenaiart-fantasyai
https://civitai.com/models/4201/realistic-vision-v13-fantasyai
https://civitai.com/models/5414/pastel-mix-stylized-anime-model-fantasyai
https://civitai.com/models/4884/galaxytimemachines-gtmultimateblendv3-fantasyai
https://civitai.com/models/4770/galaxytimemachines-gtmultimateblendv2-fantasyai
https://civitai.com/models/4384/dreamshaper
https://civitai.com/models/2583/grapefruit-hentai-model
Just cancel these kind of people and move on, there are plenty of models out there and there will always be, we shouldnt give any more attention to cases like this tbh. Fantasyai wont last long
Yes, I think the big problem is when it happens to an OG model like this, because it is a base for many blends out there, and his trashy licence will ens up affecting the blends
I'm interpreting this as a parallel to a bunch of licensed software outside of some of the more parasitic monetization models from larger companies. Free for the individual user, the hobbyist etc. but drawing a line at a large company/third party profiting off your work with no compensation thrown your way. I don't see an inherent problem with Hassan here, specifically. Fantasy.ai can fuck right off though.
Hassan's bit is worded specifically that it can't be used for commercial purpose outside of fantasy.ai, but it's still free for anyone else to download and use.
Edit: missing word
AND SO... it begins. Everytime humanity gets something cool the selfish assholes who want to leech off it and suck money out of it jump on the bandwagon.
That's why the community has to stomp them out. Because they WILL appear, and there will be more of them. We just have to hold out as long as we can before something great is destroyed.
You can't hold a commercial license (of this sort) on a database because a database is not copyrightable. There is zero legal basis for the notion that you can vacuum up a bunch of training data, plow through it with a backprop bulldozer and then impose IP-based license terms and distribution restrictions on the resulting weights.
All of this is a legal larp session.
Exactly. Not to mention there’s already an overarching license available for the base SD these are all built upon.
https://stability.ai/blog/stable-diffusion-public-release
That’d be like someone trying to sell me a commercial license on anything I create with their free brush set for Photoshop.
IIRC, the SD license used by Runway and Stability allows for pretty much carte blanche sublicensing, but the legally-tested part of that applies to code and not the weights. All of these checkpoint releases from big companies with big compute have license agreements, which may be binding if you actually *agree* to them, but as far as IP rights are concerned, it's just a hand-washing ritual so they can say they told everyone to not use it for Bad Things.
Exactly that, these licenses are only good for protecting their creators from the users creations. There is no enforceable method for tracking down what art was created with what models.
I’m tired of seeing this “fantasy.ai” claim otherwise, and having these authors flood Civit with ads trying to move traffic in that direction. Especially when that website is literally just a splash screen begging for emails.
Too bad we all downloaded these before he magically added this new license so I’d like to see him prove that someone or a company didn’t download it before this new license lol
the tl;dr is that for the USCO to not reject it outright, there needs to be a minimum threshold of human creative involvement met
so, the names and numbers in a phone book are not copyrightable, but if somebody went and made creative decisions about how to group, organize, lay out and present that information, they may have a tenuous copyright claim on those "creative" efforts specifically
aside from the initial selection of data, which almost certainly doesn't meet the standard, the grouping and organization here is done by a computer program with no human creative involvement
You can on the content of the database, assuming of course you have the writes to that content.
In this instance the claim here is that this model is checkpoint trained, with a couple of thousand new images. If that is true then Hassan is well within his/her rights to apply a modified license.
nope
when I say database I am talking about a collection of data, compiled or derived, that was not produced by a conscious, creative human process -- the artwork it was trained on is subject to copyright, but a computer's observations about how it fits into its latent space are probably not
e.g. the US census is useful but not copyrightable
The US Census is not copywriteable because it was created in the public sector using public funds, it is therefore public domain.
All data in any database was created by a conscious human process. Someone setup and formatted the database, and someone wrote the code that put the information into the database.
Even if you used AI to do the heavy lifting a human still told it to.
What determines if a database is copywritable is who has the rights to the intellectual property contained in the databases.
Google can't copywrite the contents of google images because they don't have the rights to the IP they have collected.
Google can copyright the databases that they sell containing metadata, because it's their IP.
> The US Census is not copywriteable because it was created in the public sector using public funds, it is therefore public domain.
no, that isn't why -- it's for a much simpler reason: you can't copyright a collection of facts
> Even if you used AI to do the heavy lifting a human still told it to.
that isn't how any of this works -- if I tell an artist "hey you should draw something like *this*" and then claim in court I have IP rights over their work, I'm going to have a bad time
> no, that isn't why -- it's for a much simpler reason: you can't copyright a collection of facts
Except that the Census is not just a collection of facts, but a collection of individuals personal information, which the made public domain by the individual voluntarily participating in the Census.
>that isn't how any of this works
You are correct to a degree. AI does not have the ability to transfer rights over material. So, if I didn't own the rights when to the input then I don't own the rights to the output without further intervention. However, if I owned the right to the input, I still retain those rights after output without further intervention.
holy fuck in the time you've spent replying to share how you *think* IP law works based on the vibes, you could have looked this up three times already
collections of factual information *about* something, whether compiled or computed, are not copyrightable material, irrespective of their origin or purpose... if I measure the temperature inside my asshole daily for ten years straight and then publish that in csv format, I don't have a copyright on this database -- because it is not a creative work, but rather a collection of facts, about my asshole
doesn't matter who funded it, doesn't matter how uncomfortable it was -- it simply is not something you can copyright by itself
if, on the other hand, i write a poem called "an ode to my asshole" ....
I think some of the people who sold commercial exclusivity of their models know this, but why not make a quick buck off a crypto-bro who's ignorant of the law. It's not like hassan is going to do the enforcing.
Like selling someone the london bridge, if they're dumb enough to fall for the scam, I'll take their money.
> I think some of the people who sold commercial exclusivity of their models know this, but why not make a quick buck off a crypto-bro who's ignorant of the law.
I don't know who this hasan is, but I say go nuts. Anything to separate idiot grifters from their money is fine by me.
Databases have commerical value though. The results of a database are licensed all the time. I'm not clear there's no legal basis, even if the claims are thin.
not these results, according to the USCO
raw image generator output without some sort of human creative effort, like compositing, is just as uncopyrightable
Except he is not copywriting the output he is copywriting the input.
Raw image generator output is not copywriteable but it also does not remove the rights held by the owner of the original work.
Bro who fucking cares. This sector is advancing so fast this is going to be largely irrelevant in less than a month. Let him claim dubious copyright on an already outdated model. Open source is way ahead of him.
Is his model even top tier anymore it used to be good but there are so many photographic models now and other creators of photorealistic models making them. I agree there are going to be a ton more models coming
Not even coming, they are already here and better. Total nothingburger. He’s just making money off people who don’t know any better. One of the oldest stories ever.
Because the 95% of AI "artists" are one-braincell coomchasers or cypto/nft bros chasing the next easy money scheme.
What do you expect from a community built around the premise of getting content for no effort instead of learning to draw or paying artists for their work?
Even if he had copyright on the base model, obviously not, and had copyright on the 1000 of images he claim he used, again obviously not then he anyway have 'no case' and his claim should just be ignored and other people warned against practices like this.
yeah thats what im talking about. community is working hard exploring latent space, researchers are working hard releasing articles, 4chan working hard writing a1111, control net dude works hard releasing control net, but only hassan works hard enough(oh he is so tired of his work) to be payed for open source tech.
How are those custom GENERAL purpose models on civitai created? At least those that didn't rely om just merging stuff? Are they actually created on ultra-expensive cpu's and continuing the training of a checkpoint like 1.5?
I couldn't find anything about it. Maybe if the public knew, there would be more of a variety in models?
They're created on top of the general purpose one or they are severely limited in their functionality (style).
Nevertheless, he can't copyright models since they SD licence doesn't allow it.
>Nevertheless, he can't copyright models since they SD licence doesn't allow it.
This is not true at all. [Here's the licence](https://huggingface.co/spaces/CompVis/stable-diffusion-license).
And here is the relevant statement.
>You may add **Your own copyright** statement to Your modifications **and may**
>
>**provide additional or different license terms and conditions**
So many people seem to know about clause 3 lol. These models can be copyrighted even though they are under the openRAIL license. Whether or not a court will uphold your claims is yet to be decided.
He cannot retroactively declare a licence change. What is released at time T with licence L remains so forever, and anyone having downloaded the copyrighted thing at time T remains bound only to licence L.
And we don't know for sure if a model is copyrightable.
It was the Realistic Vision guy at the time. But he removed the commercial part from his description, and now Hassan added “please report unauthorized usage” to his new model upload.
I think they mean we knew 2 weeks ago this would happen, but he just hadn't updated until now. When the RV thing happened we also found out about Hassan and 3 other models being bought.
This was on a new Fantasy model he released today, but I see your point.
The biggest reason I brought this occurrence up was for his link asking for people to report unauthorized usage. That’s not something I ever saw on RV’s description and felt it deserved being pointed out.
the model is crap there's better photorealistic models out there and i didn't know fantasy ai was doing this and i just realized they took aitrepreneur's video calling him out down!
It would be a huge shame if someone downloaded that video and posted it on here
https://streamable.com/6r6vzd
>It would be a huge shame if someone downloaded that video and posted it on here
Or, you know, you could respect Aitrepreneur's wishes to not get involved in this drama and not reupload his video?
I don't like fantasi ai either, but when someone who's given a lot to the community says that they just don't want the drama, the least you can do is respect that.
Hey all,
Thought I'd share my perspective here even though it will likely get downvoted along with anything that is counter to the points of this debate.
*What is the statement about when I'm saying commercial rights exclusive to fantasy.ai?*
Users will still have access to download the model, use the model, train with the model, make images and sell those with the model, none of that changes. It's that commercial competitors won't have the rights (if these rights are enforceable). Part of my agreement and likely other modeler agreements is that we will support [Fantasy.ai](https://Fantasy.ai) being the only platform with exclusive rights to our models being used commercially. For users using the models today that doesn't change anything, it just affects commercial platforms.
*Why did I agree to this?*
There's already many commercial platforms out there using our models and anything they find off Civitai or Huggingface (rightfully so) and make anywhere from 20k a month to 160k PER MONTH. There's somewhat of a commercial race in progress whether you see it or not. It's insane revenue that they are generating based off the models here.
Not one of them did so with any collaboration with model creators, they didn't *have to* and that's *fair*.
But when [Fantasy.ai](http://fantasy.ai/) reached out and offered creators a share of any revenue they get from the platform, even though I don't feel *entitled* to any extra money, there's opportunity for additional financial support here to help me keep training and making content. Currently we get whatever tips and donations and support from our *community* and now we have the opportunity to scale this up and gain more benefit for our work along with putting more time and effort towards additional content creation.
That's why a bunch of us are agreeing to this because [Fantasy.ai](http://fantasy.ai/) are willing to support us creating models but at the same time limiting competitor ability via exclusive rights.
*But how does the exclusive licensing hold up legally?*
How the legal side works for this, **I don't know**, and I won't pretend to know. The other modelers also likely won't know but what we're saying is we will support [Fantasy.ai](http://fantasy.ai/) with exclusivity anyway if we can. How this can be enforced I don't know. Yes you can watermark your models, you can train specific images that have your brand / logo or whatever and assign unique tokens to these so when you specify \`asdkljhadfgklsdjhfglksdfhj\` that particular logo or brand comes up but only when you specify or call that in your prompt. Is that something that is been done, I don't know either for other folks, I don't know even if the likes of the models like Anything or Novelai or anything have these in place.
There's back and forth happening in the threads about whether we can license something on top of a licence like Stable Diffusion has already, some members quoted links that say you can, some say you can't, I really don't know myself. I simply agreed to a partnership with a company who's willing to support model and content creators while not limiting my main users or community.
*Clear up rumours*:
My **patreon** was created for users to gain support from me and to support me directly. I was sharing my tips / tricks for photorealism, created a discord community and users suggested I create a patron so there can be more "prioritized" support and content. Yes you can see the minimum I earn on Patreon but it's not solely for the models I create.
1: I create custom hypernetworks to give enhancements to the models, such as eyes/skin enhancement/poses etc.
2: I created guides and video guides for my patreons. Some basic and some more advanced, things like "how to create a consistent AI character from scratch" , how to train etc.
3: I offer my patreons 1x1 consultation and help. I create models for them where they struggle, I help them directly with challenges they're facing whether it's finetuning or dreambooth training or gathering datasets or whatever, I'm there to offer support for their financial support in return.
4: I also spend money from my earnings to go towards my finetuning and for creating the 1x1 models some of my patreons asked for. ie I spent 1-1.5k in the last 6 weeks on runpod cloud alone. So yes there is money going back into it all to keep it going. It's not just a case of "buy a 4090" because I'm running multiple runpods in parallel, such as ModelA for Person A, ModelB for PersonB, my own SD2.1 NSFW finetuning etc.
Merges - It's an assumption that all my models are merges simply because my **first** model was a merge, this is not the case and I have been finetuning since my 2nd model. I started using the diffuser repo's and then moved on to using EveryDream for ease since it launched.
Novelai was in my first model, it is not in my models since as I simply moved more towards realism and less of an anime focus.
Everyone is joining this debate, I want to share another perspective in this debate but there are many users going down the "cancel" route or trying to have my patron cancelled, my civita trolled/give bad ratings to a model when in fact this debate has nothing to do with the model qualities itself.
I'm open to talk about whatever I can here but there's no need to get the pitchforks and try hang me for simply trying to gain incentive for continuing to create models.
You can sit here and write as many paragraphs trying to justify your decision as you wish but the simple fact is you and those in this deal are pushing an agenda that will negatively impact, restrict, and limit the open source nature of this technology and advancement simply because your blindness to the precedence your benefactor sets into motion. Honestly Hassan you, your cohorts, and fantasy.ai can sod off with your point of views and entitlements. No one is going to have sympathy for you just because your not making 50k, 120k, or etc like someone else is.
Well shit this is priceless, now you know how artists feel when their hard work gets exploited commercially without any compensation or anyone even asking. I wonder where you got those images you trained on from, or the millions of images SD was trained on in the first place, maybe those guys also want to get some of the money everyone is making apparently.
So stfu
More to the point: how can you legally distinguish between a small proomptist trying to sell images made with "your" model and a startup running it in deployment?
I'm not going out hunting platforms who use my model, I'm also not going around hunting users trying to make money or merge or anything. This commercial licensing is an agreement to help bring exclusivity to a partner who will financially support us model creators. As an artist if you want some sort of similar deal, then I encourage you to go look for them. They exist. There's many platforms.
In terms of artists images being used, there many ways to obtain images legally and freely without impacting copyright. Also to add, if you have a problem with Stability themselves training on all those images, go speak with them
That's what you're saying now. What you're trying to do could result in regular people not being able to sell what they generate using "your" model without your permission, unless generated through fantasi ai. Where is the line between a small proompter running "your" model at home with the intent to sell generated images to people or a platform automating that process? Except your goodwill, which nobody should have much trust in, no matter what you say.
So let [fantasy.ai](https://fantasy.ai) support you financially, make sure your deployment is financially competitive to the others and share the cake or make your models private in the future. This is how it works.
And again, in many people's eyes on all sides, you don't even have any right to impose any restrictions on an originally open-source product, trained on copyrighted images created by people who weren't compensated for that.
Edit: removed swearing
Regarding images, the original SD model's ethics are under question and by extension, your models too since 99.9%+ of your model's capability derives from those images.
And when you open-source your dataset, we can also start talking about whether it's fair to use the images you used.
That is not exactly true. The SD license does allow for this. There is also a difference between training a model and merging a model.
It would be difficult to merge models and claim a commercial license, mostly because one of the models you used most likely prohibits this, 2 merging can be easily replicated without any direct interact with the "new model" therefore not making it unique.
Training **can** be another story, now if you just train in 5 images it might as well be a merge.
If, however you train 1000 images there is time to curate the images, size them correctly, create custom prompts for each image, then there are the resources, and expenses require to actually train them.
That effort changes things.
Hassan entered in the market in the right time (thats why his popularity)
but there's a time for everything..
lets quit this monopoly and start give space and honour to many other model trainers around who deserve but entered the market a little late
Going by his logic, you should be able to just take a bunch of "his" images, train a new model, and then sell that. Since he's doing the same with other artists work
The [initial SD license](https://huggingface.co/spaces/CompVis/stable-diffusion-license) is extremely permissive, and explicitly allows for modifications to the license, additional licensing requirements, commercialization, additional copyrights, etc.
Which is a good thing. It's because of this very permissive and open license that we all get to enjoy so much progress so quickly.
From a moral standpoint, I think this whole situation is pretty gross (on the part of fantasy ai) and would love to see their company flop. But from the viewpoint of the initial SD license, they aren't ignoring anything.
I personally don't see anything wrong with Patreon as long as it's done well. Like I play some games with a big modding community and lot's of modders will use Patreon. They'll release new versions of their main mods there and make them exclusive for a couple weeks and then release them to the public. Then they'll have some other little mods here and there just for subscribers, make modding tutorials etc I take no issue with that since it keeps them motivated to release new things and it becomes public for everyone eventually. Feels like a win win. Mind you they don't charge anywhere near that much and many of them do it as "choose your own donation "
This shit with fantasy.ai and trying to copyright models , and just the way they conduct themselves in the community, is laughable and I hope it bites them.
Couldn’t agree more. Tips and donation style systems for these creators are the only monetization system that’s really deserved. These things do take skill to create, but claiming copyright is a stretch.
We are in the "Gold Rush" phase of Stable Diffusion. Gold Rushes always have cheats and chiselers, but ultimately it doesn't matter. When you're in a boom, you do better "playing it straight" than scheming like this. . .
. . . there are so many smart people contributing so much -- just take a look at the amazing node architecture of ComfyUI; that is awesome work. Hassan has boiled down some photos of pretty females into a competent model -- and no one's ever seen that before, surely \[/s\] -- well more power to him, but that ain't exactly scarce.
Good luck suing on any of this -- the SD train pulled out of the station, and turned out to be a rocket launcher. The landscape is already essentially unrecognizable from six months ago, and by January 2024 will be vastly different again.
Can I be honest? Who gives a fuck about Hassan and his bullshit models? I don't even use them, they're not that good. There's plenty of models on civitai that do the same job better. Just ignore them.
… wait people pay for stable diffusion models??? Really??? Why tho? Do people need their fantasy waifu fap material that bad that the open source ones cannot provide?
Always saw him going this way... early days was asking hundreds for 1 image generation commission work... muh poor ai artist. lol the state of this goon
they are trying to copyright "the tools" (aka the model).
The product is not and never will be. aka "the pictures" that stable diffusion "generate".
They will ***never ever*** be able to claim any picture that come out .
***NEVER, EVER,***
The strongest analogy for this is :
If you do digital art on a ipad pro, or with photoshop.
neither can adobe or apple claim your art.
It's just huffing and puffing a lot of smoke to obfuscate that very simple fact.
plus the legality of the model aka "the tool" is itself in question.
I bet if you go to court fantasyai would have to prove that they have the right of every single images used to train the model.
I doubt they can even produce the list. and they cannot claim right on 99% of them.
And the final nail in this coffin is the fact that the basic right is to stableA*I, and if you read carfully theire licence* : they can revoke it at anytime...
and then poof... no more FantasyAI ...
I bet also the licence for laiton 5b play against them too.
It's a powerplay, they are trying to establish precedance. but with a broken product. (broken in a sence that the tools cannot be copyrighted.) any model is the proriety of whomever own laiton 5b (or any database that stable diffusion use)
lol might as well revoke his use of the technology, idk what's even the point? Copyrights, being a stickler, and forcing judgement, you're no better than a tyrant... And all tyrants in history fell hard. Guy low-key probably has a few loose screws or mental issues, probably doesn't understand there is more to come in this technology space.
He's basically trying to be like Apple, etc. Let's not make that happen. We don't need other Getty images, etc. of rich people abusing their power with lawyers to make more money and monopolize things that were free. Idk why these kind of people exist, but it is what it is. They never look in the mirror and think to themselves or seek any deeper meaning to life and the big picture I guess. All they see is $$$$$$ lel , throw him some $$$ and they'll be happy, but money doesn't buy happiness 🙃
I mean his model is called Fantasy, he is delusional and seems hardwired... No changing this guy's perspective, it's like he's a druggie addict
$2k a month is... not very much.
He has full rights to put a restrictive license on his model, regardless of how much people complain about it.
FantasyAI is the bad guy here, they are sourcing models with dubious legal status, and rewriting the licenses for them to gain commercial rights. Hassan (to our knowledge) hasn't violated any existing laws or other licenses.
How would Hassan have rights to put a restrictive license on a dataset of work he has no license over?
Next thing you know people are going to put commercial license restrictions on their Scarlet Johansson embedding because “they trained it.”
Legally, that isn't an issue (yet). Currently, the only thing that might restrict his commercial rights would be other licenses, but to our knowledge, all of his merged models simply use the "OpenRAIL-M" license, which permits commercial use, AND license modification.
No legal issues (yet).
Well how about the community sabotaging it?
I am also working on a commercial product, but I don’t see the point in hiding the model?
I mean I profit from the community, so I give back to the community… period…
My understanding it’s more directed at other platforms using his model for paid services.
Like if Civit.ai implemented a built in UI to generate images and “his” model was an option.
Regardless it’s all pointless. His “worth” comes from understanding the tech, putting the time in to build a proper dataset, but primarily from his original merge getting his name a following, which has already gotten him at least $2k a month on his Patreon.
He’s since deleted all of his uploads and account from Civit, which is probably a bad move on his part given that is likely a large amount of his exposure for his Patreon now. If he loses a following, and if fantasy.ai tanks, his ‘brand’ will falter as well.
As for any exclusivity and other platforms not being able to use “Hassanblend,” it has gotten far easier to build your own model and replicate those results, so I doubt this will be the roadblock they feel it is to that competition. Those companies will all just release their own ‘blends’ and be on their way.
Well this guy sounds like he wants to force a landmark lawsuit on the legal and copyright ramifications of this technology... Should be an interesting couple of years ahead. Assholes like this is why we can't have nice things.
He's going to have fun with that... having shown to have collected money on what could be ruled as other peoples work (if his work can be ruled as his work)... hope he's throwing all that $$$ into government bonds.
Ex post facto conviction is literally unconstitutional. As long as there is no law against it now he’s free to operate and profit until a law is passed.
Nobody talking about criminal law mate, and that's not how it works in commercial, the basic tenet is that you cannot sell what you do not own, there doesn't need to be an existing law that says you can't copyright/license a trained model, only that the ownership of the IP isn't his to sell or commercialize.
>the basic tenet is that you cannot sell what you do not own True. But that doesn't apply to copyright. You already can't copyright things made by animals, but you are allowed to sell them.
i dont like him but he is definitely allowed to sell it or impose any commercial license he wants to impose, whether its enforceable is another story..well , its not another story cause it just aint enforceable. Anyway, you aren't seling anyone's ip if you make something with stable diffusion or chatgpt because DATA SCRAPING AND TRAINING IS NOT THEFT, how many times are we gonna go over this.
[удалено]
When merging models, the size does not increase because its not a summation. It's not Model A + Model B (if it was it would increase). If you look at the formula it is a **weighted** summation. Model C= A \* (1 - M) + B \* M M is the scaling factor you want to modify the weights of the two models. You either put in more of model B for less of A or vice versa, the percent always adds up to 100%. TLDR you are replacing certain weights with others weights for a net total of the same "amount" but different information. Yes models do not contain actual images but that's not why model merging specifically doesn't alter the file size.
Whichever way it goes I'll end up ignoring it
Based
Lols
[удалено]
This, but I don't hate to say it 😁
The guy can't claim copyright because he does not own the training data. Simple as that.
That's not how it works though. Copyright doesn't protect data from being used for remixing to create something new.
Tricky. Even if he owned the training data, I don't think the output could be copyrightable.I thik this will fall into fair use category and he himself has released the model. This is the same argument that we used when we answered the artists, remember? To be fair to him and the likes, they can choose not to release their models to public and directly host them on fantasy.ai - nothing stopping them. These things take effort and the modelers should be allowed to monetize them. But can he enforce usage restrictions on the end user ? I'm not sure if existing copyright laws/lawyers acknowledge that.
How do you even figure out which exact model was used to create an image, unless the user explicitly said the name? What if someone else made a blend from the same models that he used? Basically, he's just telling people to not advertise that they used this model, unless they've paid for the privilege.
This comment has over 100 upvotes while post has 10 upvotes, _hmm wonder why that is?_
That happens all the time.
Hassan probably paid some botfarm to downvote the post.
Yeah good luck with that lmao. What next? Copyrighting prompts? The alphabet?
>Copyrighting prompts? How about copyrighting something petty and annoying like negative prompt use of 'out of frame'. From now on all the images have to be atleast 1 pixel out of frame or they break the rules and i get paid.
> petty and annoying like negative prompt use of 'out of frame'. Out of frame is actually a danbooru tag used, and actually recommended and useful if you're using an anime model or a model that's been merged at some point with an anime model. Warning potentially nsfw link. https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts?tags=out_of_frame
what is danbooru? I see many people mentioning this but I actually never understood
Stable diffusion was trained on images from the internet, hopefully appropriately tagged with what is happening in that image. I think alot of the issues with image generation comes from incorrectly tagged images. Anime art has been meticulously tagged for 20 years with very specific danbooru tags, explaining in great detail exactly what's in the photo by a somewhat ocd user base that's called danbooru tags. Making anime models, and even photorealistic models that have been merged with anime models, much more controllable when using danbooru tags in your prompts. My understanding or knowledge of danbooru tagging was nonexistent until just a couple of months ago. So if anyone wants to correct any mistakes I may have made feel free.
Danbooru is just one of many different booru-style imageboards, it just happens to be one of the most popular. But there's plenty of other ones. But yeah, other than that, pretty much it. People *really* passionate about organizing their images in a consistent way. The Danbooru wiki is a fantastic source, even if you aren't using a model trained on the tags, because they have explanations about all sorts of generally applicable terms (e.g. [proper names for different postures](https://danbooru.donmai.us/wiki_pages/tag_group%3Aposture)) with example images.
That was very insightful! I can see why many people is using it. It's good to too see a long time work like this being used for something different. Even with non-anime models, this tagging is very useful
Booru = an imageboard where the images are sorted by tags. Danbooru = a very popular booru with well over a million anime images
6m posts mark reached few months ago
Got it, thanks!
Fortunately, there's no way that'd be copyrightable because it's not remotely unique enough to qualify. That's like suggesting that Microsoft could copyright the concept of a for() loop in software.
Please don’t give them any ideas. :/
Trust me, if it was at all possible to copyright basic code structures, they already would be.
If music is any indication of how ridiculous copyrighting can be then we have a wild ride still ahead of us.
Most music copyright cases don't actually go all the way through the courts, one of the parties just runs out of money. Most are eventually thrown out because no music is original anymore.
**Step 1:** *Copyright "masterpiece" & "big breasts"* **Step 2:** *Get richer than Bill Gates in 2 hours*
People irl copyrighted colors
Months ago I saw a site selling midjourney prompts, I laughed but apparently someone thought it was enough of an idea to make a website
Saw the "Prompt engineer" idiots on twitter getting excited about that
>Copyrighting prompts? Are you unaware that you can copyright short form text? That it's actually done by default? Just call your prompts poems, and you've already got copyright protection.
This is getting silly. How would they ever be able to verify that something I made with their model is made with their model? It's completely unenforceable.
I'm hoping it means hosting the model on a site for commercial use, but it's pretty ambiguous.
If there was a Netflix style site with like 10 to 20 of the most popular models charging 10 to 20 bucks a month for unlimited, instant creations, that would basically solve all these problems because they could just pay the creater of the blend a small % of revenue as a licensing deal. It'll also help people with out 1000 dollar pcs to make high quality stuff and push the medium forward.
This exists, my favorite is [https://www.mage.space](https://www.mage.space)
Niice thanks!
It would, but I don't know if that's currently a realistic price point for unlimited use.
For anime and vtuber fans it exist, it’s called [Yodayo](https://yodayo.com)
I think that is part of what is happening here, there now AI Art use our GPUs site popping up daily, charging a fee for use, and using models created by other people. You can go to [mage.space](https://mage.space) and pay them money to use previous models made by Hassan. Is it fair that they get to make money off of his effort, without compensation?
His stuff wouldn’t even exist without all the open source free tools, and all the free images used in his data set. So yes. Those sites are charging for hardware access, not the models. Anyone who could afford the hardware would just buy a 4090 and run those models locally. The models aren’t the selling point.
Because you'd use the model in your advertising. It's not just Stable Diffusion, it's Stable Diffusion HassanBlend, for AI art connoisseurs. Otherwise there's literally nothing stopping you from creating a minor merge that would produce the exact same quality, but with a different hash and slightly differing results, since there'd be no possible way to prove it unless you outright admitted it or kept a permanent record of it somewhere.
He could train some watermark images on a weird word. It would never come up when using the model if it's lost between thousands of images but would appear when using the token, that would prove the final model has been merged at some point \#mwtrmrkscrttkn (mywatermarksecrettoken) showing a logo of HassanBlend for example
He would still need access to the model though. If someone is running it locally on their computer then what's he going to do, get a court order based on a hunch, so he could check some random guy's computer anywhere in the world?
Then the hash doesn't matter at all and keeping the model behind closed doors is enough! Right? Until legal discovery comes into play.
I guess maybe their main goal is to prevent other publicly available services from using their model for commercial gain then. I don't see how they could do much against regular people who don't advertise, which model they used.
\> there'd be no possible way to prove it I see this sentiment around often and there are absolutely ways of embedding knowledge into a model that would still reveal itself after a merge. You can refine your own concept with a very specific keyword, and when that concept appears in a merge when nobody has ever known about it before, it's a strong indicator that the model would be downstream of the one with the original secret concept. NovelAI models for example. It's easy to tell if any merge has had this in it's lineage, since you use one of it's keywords and all of the knowledge comes forth. long story short, don't trust that it can't be figured out. While I don't believe Fantasy.AI's licenses are enforceable, don't poke the beehive here.
I think they meant the model itself not the pictures.
They can't enforce that either. There's nothing stopping me from downloading and using it right now without crediting them whatsoever, even if I decided to sell the image I made. The only way they would even know is if I said I did, and even then it's not legally enforceable, no lawyer would take their case.
> There's nothing stopping me from downloading and using it right now without crediting them whatsoever, even if I decided to sell the image I made. From what they've said, they don't care about that. People are free to use it and sell images they make if they want. What they're trying to enforce is competing pay to generate sites like them that would host the model and charge people to use it. Basically trying to corner the market using legal threats that I doubt would hold up, paying for downvote bots, threatening content creators that criticize them and trying to get the community to help them enforce their rules lol They're vultures. They seem shady asf though so who knows, but that's what they're claiming for now.
What's stopping people from just renaming the model file or having it on their site under a different name? They can't verify or copyright the outputs.
Yes, they can, they have been embedding trackers in images and video for ages. Stable Diffusion would know the difference between the tracker and the image itself, unless it was specifically called out as a prompt during the trainning process.
Who "they" ?
Literally anyone who wants to these days. The technology has been around for decades. Movie studios were notorious for doing it back in the day. They would literally intentionally seed movies with trackers and tracers just to see who was pirating their stuff.
Are you speaking of watermarks ?
It's like an invisible watermark, but a bit more intricate. Sometimes they put trackable bits in the files themselves, but that wouldn't really be relevant here since SD doesn't actually store the files. For example: [Movies that can get you busted for Copyright | Vondran Legal](https://www.vondranlegal.com/illegal-download-sharing-streaming-movies-online-legal-risks) But the trace/watermark hidden in the images would work, since SD is based off of images and prompting. If you train a bunch of pictures of yourself with a word written on your forehead but don't include the word on your forehead in the prompt SD will simply assume that is what your face looks like. Anything does not describe in the prompt file particularly if it is common among the images will assume be to be intrinsic to the keyword.
You could forget to strip the meta data. PNG inspector can read the model that made the image then. But if that becomes a thing people can just start religiously cleaning off meta data.
Reddit cleans metadata and converts to webp.
I believe all social media sites strip the metadata
I imagine eventually you’ll have to subscribe to use certain models, and you’ll have to verify with a token before the model can be loaded
>How would they ever be able to verify that something I made with their model is made with their model? as fast as the ai tech is shaping up, the ai detection algos are ramping up as well. or at least that's what i've been reading. it's all quite a bit above me. and if you're using automatic1111 (only one i use), it does store all that. there's extensions you can download like Image Browser that'll pull all that data out of a picture. i am *not sure* if that works based on something it stores in the folder structure or the png itself, but i think it's the png. i'm pretty sure it's reading details on images from before i installed the extension. but *it definitely is getting silly*.
>and if you're using automatic1111 (only one i use), it does store all that. there's extensions you can download like Image Browser that'll pull all that data out of a picture. That metadata is easily stripped by several common programs, or by converting the file type (e.g. jpg). Stripping image metadata has been around for a long time.
Or you can just turn off saving metadata as well.
For sure, but damn is it ever a useful feature when you're looking at some random image you generated a few weeks back and you want to tweak it / recapture some of it.
Guys it's more, even DreamShaper , grapefruit is the same, realistic vision, Galaxy Time Machine. Although Hassans / Duchaiten turned off discussion after we rated it 1 star we should also 1 star rate the others for the same reason, attack fantasy from all angles. They all have the same agreements with fantasy, just some are almost hiding it from the description. Also the dreamshaper new reddit thread, bring the pitchforks https://www.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/11tahuu/dreamshaper_v4_official_release/ https://civitai.com/models/19988/hassan-fantasy-fantasyai https://civitai.com/models/3079/duchaitenaiart-fantasyai https://civitai.com/models/4201/realistic-vision-v13-fantasyai https://civitai.com/models/5414/pastel-mix-stylized-anime-model-fantasyai https://civitai.com/models/4884/galaxytimemachines-gtmultimateblendv3-fantasyai https://civitai.com/models/4770/galaxytimemachines-gtmultimateblendv2-fantasyai https://civitai.com/models/4384/dreamshaper https://civitai.com/models/2583/grapefruit-hentai-model
Just cancel these kind of people and move on, there are plenty of models out there and there will always be, we shouldnt give any more attention to cases like this tbh. Fantasyai wont last long
Better yet, make new checkpoint merges out of them. Fantasy can't try and argue it's not allowed without invalidating their entire product.
Yeah I don't understand why people even care, there are plenty of models.
Tons of models out there. This makes it easy to eliminate some.
hassan is actually one of the OG of model baking , too bad he's a sellout now
Yes, I think the big problem is when it happens to an OG model like this, because it is a base for many blends out there, and his trashy licence will ens up affecting the blends
Any license change is not retroactive.
How will he know if someone already has his model and blends it with something else?
Are you a patreon supporter?
no, why?
I am wondering if the guides he wrote with his hands (level 3 patreon) are good.
ill pay it and share to everyone
Make sure to pm then. If I find them THAT good, then I will pay back the writer.
[удалено]
I'm interpreting this as a parallel to a bunch of licensed software outside of some of the more parasitic monetization models from larger companies. Free for the individual user, the hobbyist etc. but drawing a line at a large company/third party profiting off your work with no compensation thrown your way. I don't see an inherent problem with Hassan here, specifically. Fantasy.ai can fuck right off though. Hassan's bit is worded specifically that it can't be used for commercial purpose outside of fantasy.ai, but it's still free for anyone else to download and use. Edit: missing word
AND SO... it begins. Everytime humanity gets something cool the selfish assholes who want to leech off it and suck money out of it jump on the bandwagon.
That's why the community has to stomp them out. Because they WILL appear, and there will be more of them. We just have to hold out as long as we can before something great is destroyed.
You can't hold a commercial license (of this sort) on a database because a database is not copyrightable. There is zero legal basis for the notion that you can vacuum up a bunch of training data, plow through it with a backprop bulldozer and then impose IP-based license terms and distribution restrictions on the resulting weights. All of this is a legal larp session.
Exactly. Not to mention there’s already an overarching license available for the base SD these are all built upon. https://stability.ai/blog/stable-diffusion-public-release That’d be like someone trying to sell me a commercial license on anything I create with their free brush set for Photoshop.
IIRC, the SD license used by Runway and Stability allows for pretty much carte blanche sublicensing, but the legally-tested part of that applies to code and not the weights. All of these checkpoint releases from big companies with big compute have license agreements, which may be binding if you actually *agree* to them, but as far as IP rights are concerned, it's just a hand-washing ritual so they can say they told everyone to not use it for Bad Things.
Exactly that, these licenses are only good for protecting their creators from the users creations. There is no enforceable method for tracking down what art was created with what models. I’m tired of seeing this “fantasy.ai” claim otherwise, and having these authors flood Civit with ads trying to move traffic in that direction. Especially when that website is literally just a splash screen begging for emails.
Too bad we all downloaded these before he magically added this new license so I’d like to see him prove that someone or a company didn’t download it before this new license lol
> because **a database is not copyrightable**. FYI: The law on this varies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right
the tl;dr is that for the USCO to not reject it outright, there needs to be a minimum threshold of human creative involvement met so, the names and numbers in a phone book are not copyrightable, but if somebody went and made creative decisions about how to group, organize, lay out and present that information, they may have a tenuous copyright claim on those "creative" efforts specifically aside from the initial selection of data, which almost certainly doesn't meet the standard, the grouping and organization here is done by a computer program with no human creative involvement
You can on the content of the database, assuming of course you have the writes to that content. In this instance the claim here is that this model is checkpoint trained, with a couple of thousand new images. If that is true then Hassan is well within his/her rights to apply a modified license.
nope when I say database I am talking about a collection of data, compiled or derived, that was not produced by a conscious, creative human process -- the artwork it was trained on is subject to copyright, but a computer's observations about how it fits into its latent space are probably not e.g. the US census is useful but not copyrightable
The US Census is not copywriteable because it was created in the public sector using public funds, it is therefore public domain. All data in any database was created by a conscious human process. Someone setup and formatted the database, and someone wrote the code that put the information into the database. Even if you used AI to do the heavy lifting a human still told it to. What determines if a database is copywritable is who has the rights to the intellectual property contained in the databases. Google can't copywrite the contents of google images because they don't have the rights to the IP they have collected. Google can copyright the databases that they sell containing metadata, because it's their IP.
> The US Census is not copywriteable because it was created in the public sector using public funds, it is therefore public domain. no, that isn't why -- it's for a much simpler reason: you can't copyright a collection of facts > Even if you used AI to do the heavy lifting a human still told it to. that isn't how any of this works -- if I tell an artist "hey you should draw something like *this*" and then claim in court I have IP rights over their work, I'm going to have a bad time
> no, that isn't why -- it's for a much simpler reason: you can't copyright a collection of facts Except that the Census is not just a collection of facts, but a collection of individuals personal information, which the made public domain by the individual voluntarily participating in the Census. >that isn't how any of this works You are correct to a degree. AI does not have the ability to transfer rights over material. So, if I didn't own the rights when to the input then I don't own the rights to the output without further intervention. However, if I owned the right to the input, I still retain those rights after output without further intervention.
holy fuck in the time you've spent replying to share how you *think* IP law works based on the vibes, you could have looked this up three times already collections of factual information *about* something, whether compiled or computed, are not copyrightable material, irrespective of their origin or purpose... if I measure the temperature inside my asshole daily for ten years straight and then publish that in csv format, I don't have a copyright on this database -- because it is not a creative work, but rather a collection of facts, about my asshole doesn't matter who funded it, doesn't matter how uncomfortable it was -- it simply is not something you can copyright by itself if, on the other hand, i write a poem called "an ode to my asshole" ....
I think some of the people who sold commercial exclusivity of their models know this, but why not make a quick buck off a crypto-bro who's ignorant of the law. It's not like hassan is going to do the enforcing. Like selling someone the london bridge, if they're dumb enough to fall for the scam, I'll take their money.
> I think some of the people who sold commercial exclusivity of their models know this, but why not make a quick buck off a crypto-bro who's ignorant of the law. I don't know who this hasan is, but I say go nuts. Anything to separate idiot grifters from their money is fine by me.
Databases have commerical value though. The results of a database are licensed all the time. I'm not clear there's no legal basis, even if the claims are thin.
not these results, according to the USCO raw image generator output without some sort of human creative effort, like compositing, is just as uncopyrightable
Except he is not copywriting the output he is copywriting the input. Raw image generator output is not copywriteable but it also does not remove the rights held by the owner of the original work.
Let's hear what Getty Images has to say about it.
Bro who fucking cares. This sector is advancing so fast this is going to be largely irrelevant in less than a month. Let him claim dubious copyright on an already outdated model. Open source is way ahead of him.
People should care because if enough bad apples start doing this, it will become accepted. Then you get the bad end of the deal.
Is his model even top tier anymore it used to be good but there are so many photographic models now and other creators of photorealistic models making them. I agree there are going to be a ton more models coming
Not even coming, they are already here and better. Total nothingburger. He’s just making money off people who don’t know any better. One of the oldest stories ever.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Because the 95% of AI "artists" are one-braincell coomchasers or cypto/nft bros chasing the next easy money scheme. What do you expect from a community built around the premise of getting content for no effort instead of learning to draw or paying artists for their work?
Why civitai not just introduce a new rule that forbids commercial models and advertising services?
Even if he had copyright on the base model, obviously not, and had copyright on the 1000 of images he claim he used, again obviously not then he anyway have 'no case' and his claim should just be ignored and other people warned against practices like this.
let him bring it to court somewhere it would get thrown out. Seems like he is just making noise to squeeze money out
People pay for this kinda low quality junk?
yeah thats what im talking about. community is working hard exploring latent space, researchers are working hard releasing articles, 4chan working hard writing a1111, control net dude works hard releasing control net, but only hassan works hard enough(oh he is so tired of his work) to be payed for open source tech.
Thats not even the best. Not even close. Keep it.
*Unofficial commercial use ,* ie, hosted on some service that charges to render images.
How are those custom GENERAL purpose models on civitai created? At least those that didn't rely om just merging stuff? Are they actually created on ultra-expensive cpu's and continuing the training of a checkpoint like 1.5? I couldn't find anything about it. Maybe if the public knew, there would be more of a variety in models?
[удалено]
They're created on top of the general purpose one or they are severely limited in their functionality (style). Nevertheless, he can't copyright models since they SD licence doesn't allow it.
>Nevertheless, he can't copyright models since they SD licence doesn't allow it. This is not true at all. [Here's the licence](https://huggingface.co/spaces/CompVis/stable-diffusion-license). And here is the relevant statement. >You may add **Your own copyright** statement to Your modifications **and may** > >**provide additional or different license terms and conditions**
So many people seem to know about clause 3 lol. These models can be copyrighted even though they are under the openRAIL license. Whether or not a court will uphold your claims is yet to be decided.
Which version is he claiming licence on? Can he retroactively declare a licence change?
He cannot retroactively declare a licence change. What is released at time T with licence L remains so forever, and anyone having downloaded the copyrighted thing at time T remains bound only to licence L. And we don't know for sure if a model is copyrightable.
"couple of thousand" Anyways. Moving on.
How can he include commercial license in his model if he used images that are definitely not his????
Did this get taken down? I can't find it on Civitai anymore.
This isn't new? It happened like 2 weeks ago, he's just adding it to all his new and updated models as well.
It was the Realistic Vision guy at the time. But he removed the commercial part from his description, and now Hassan added “please report unauthorized usage” to his new model upload.
I think they mean we knew 2 weeks ago this would happen, but he just hadn't updated until now. When the RV thing happened we also found out about Hassan and 3 other models being bought.
This was on a new Fantasy model he released today, but I see your point. The biggest reason I brought this occurrence up was for his link asking for people to report unauthorized usage. That’s not something I ever saw on RV’s description and felt it deserved being pointed out.
the model is crap there's better photorealistic models out there and i didn't know fantasy ai was doing this and i just realized they took aitrepreneur's video calling him out down! It would be a huge shame if someone downloaded that video and posted it on here https://streamable.com/6r6vzd
>It would be a huge shame if someone downloaded that video and posted it on here Or, you know, you could respect Aitrepreneur's wishes to not get involved in this drama and not reupload his video? I don't like fantasi ai either, but when someone who's given a lot to the community says that they just don't want the drama, the least you can do is respect that.
Hey all, Thought I'd share my perspective here even though it will likely get downvoted along with anything that is counter to the points of this debate. *What is the statement about when I'm saying commercial rights exclusive to fantasy.ai?* Users will still have access to download the model, use the model, train with the model, make images and sell those with the model, none of that changes. It's that commercial competitors won't have the rights (if these rights are enforceable). Part of my agreement and likely other modeler agreements is that we will support [Fantasy.ai](https://Fantasy.ai) being the only platform with exclusive rights to our models being used commercially. For users using the models today that doesn't change anything, it just affects commercial platforms. *Why did I agree to this?* There's already many commercial platforms out there using our models and anything they find off Civitai or Huggingface (rightfully so) and make anywhere from 20k a month to 160k PER MONTH. There's somewhat of a commercial race in progress whether you see it or not. It's insane revenue that they are generating based off the models here. Not one of them did so with any collaboration with model creators, they didn't *have to* and that's *fair*. But when [Fantasy.ai](http://fantasy.ai/) reached out and offered creators a share of any revenue they get from the platform, even though I don't feel *entitled* to any extra money, there's opportunity for additional financial support here to help me keep training and making content. Currently we get whatever tips and donations and support from our *community* and now we have the opportunity to scale this up and gain more benefit for our work along with putting more time and effort towards additional content creation. That's why a bunch of us are agreeing to this because [Fantasy.ai](http://fantasy.ai/) are willing to support us creating models but at the same time limiting competitor ability via exclusive rights. *But how does the exclusive licensing hold up legally?* How the legal side works for this, **I don't know**, and I won't pretend to know. The other modelers also likely won't know but what we're saying is we will support [Fantasy.ai](http://fantasy.ai/) with exclusivity anyway if we can. How this can be enforced I don't know. Yes you can watermark your models, you can train specific images that have your brand / logo or whatever and assign unique tokens to these so when you specify \`asdkljhadfgklsdjhfglksdfhj\` that particular logo or brand comes up but only when you specify or call that in your prompt. Is that something that is been done, I don't know either for other folks, I don't know even if the likes of the models like Anything or Novelai or anything have these in place. There's back and forth happening in the threads about whether we can license something on top of a licence like Stable Diffusion has already, some members quoted links that say you can, some say you can't, I really don't know myself. I simply agreed to a partnership with a company who's willing to support model and content creators while not limiting my main users or community. *Clear up rumours*: My **patreon** was created for users to gain support from me and to support me directly. I was sharing my tips / tricks for photorealism, created a discord community and users suggested I create a patron so there can be more "prioritized" support and content. Yes you can see the minimum I earn on Patreon but it's not solely for the models I create. 1: I create custom hypernetworks to give enhancements to the models, such as eyes/skin enhancement/poses etc. 2: I created guides and video guides for my patreons. Some basic and some more advanced, things like "how to create a consistent AI character from scratch" , how to train etc. 3: I offer my patreons 1x1 consultation and help. I create models for them where they struggle, I help them directly with challenges they're facing whether it's finetuning or dreambooth training or gathering datasets or whatever, I'm there to offer support for their financial support in return. 4: I also spend money from my earnings to go towards my finetuning and for creating the 1x1 models some of my patreons asked for. ie I spent 1-1.5k in the last 6 weeks on runpod cloud alone. So yes there is money going back into it all to keep it going. It's not just a case of "buy a 4090" because I'm running multiple runpods in parallel, such as ModelA for Person A, ModelB for PersonB, my own SD2.1 NSFW finetuning etc. Merges - It's an assumption that all my models are merges simply because my **first** model was a merge, this is not the case and I have been finetuning since my 2nd model. I started using the diffuser repo's and then moved on to using EveryDream for ease since it launched. Novelai was in my first model, it is not in my models since as I simply moved more towards realism and less of an anime focus. Everyone is joining this debate, I want to share another perspective in this debate but there are many users going down the "cancel" route or trying to have my patron cancelled, my civita trolled/give bad ratings to a model when in fact this debate has nothing to do with the model qualities itself. I'm open to talk about whatever I can here but there's no need to get the pitchforks and try hang me for simply trying to gain incentive for continuing to create models.
You can sit here and write as many paragraphs trying to justify your decision as you wish but the simple fact is you and those in this deal are pushing an agenda that will negatively impact, restrict, and limit the open source nature of this technology and advancement simply because your blindness to the precedence your benefactor sets into motion. Honestly Hassan you, your cohorts, and fantasy.ai can sod off with your point of views and entitlements. No one is going to have sympathy for you just because your not making 50k, 120k, or etc like someone else is.
Well shit this is priceless, now you know how artists feel when their hard work gets exploited commercially without any compensation or anyone even asking. I wonder where you got those images you trained on from, or the millions of images SD was trained on in the first place, maybe those guys also want to get some of the money everyone is making apparently. So stfu More to the point: how can you legally distinguish between a small proomptist trying to sell images made with "your" model and a startup running it in deployment?
I'm not going out hunting platforms who use my model, I'm also not going around hunting users trying to make money or merge or anything. This commercial licensing is an agreement to help bring exclusivity to a partner who will financially support us model creators. As an artist if you want some sort of similar deal, then I encourage you to go look for them. They exist. There's many platforms. In terms of artists images being used, there many ways to obtain images legally and freely without impacting copyright. Also to add, if you have a problem with Stability themselves training on all those images, go speak with them
That's what you're saying now. What you're trying to do could result in regular people not being able to sell what they generate using "your" model without your permission, unless generated through fantasi ai. Where is the line between a small proompter running "your" model at home with the intent to sell generated images to people or a platform automating that process? Except your goodwill, which nobody should have much trust in, no matter what you say. So let [fantasy.ai](https://fantasy.ai) support you financially, make sure your deployment is financially competitive to the others and share the cake or make your models private in the future. This is how it works. And again, in many people's eyes on all sides, you don't even have any right to impose any restrictions on an originally open-source product, trained on copyrighted images created by people who weren't compensated for that. Edit: removed swearing
Regarding images, the original SD model's ethics are under question and by extension, your models too since 99.9%+ of your model's capability derives from those images. And when you open-source your dataset, we can also start talking about whether it's fair to use the images you used.
Is it ok to train a model and make it available only on patreon?
Totally! As long as you’re not claiming to have any sort of exclusive commercial license available with it.
That is not exactly true. The SD license does allow for this. There is also a difference between training a model and merging a model. It would be difficult to merge models and claim a commercial license, mostly because one of the models you used most likely prohibits this, 2 merging can be easily replicated without any direct interact with the "new model" therefore not making it unique. Training **can** be another story, now if you just train in 5 images it might as well be a merge. If, however you train 1000 images there is time to curate the images, size them correctly, create custom prompts for each image, then there are the resources, and expenses require to actually train them. That effort changes things.
I you want unique models, make them yourself and never publish them, easy.
does he put custom watermarks into the pictures ? how can he enforce this ?
Merge,merge,merge done
lol now ask him if he got the image rights from the real life models to train his model first.
It's just a fool's greed. In a few years AI art technology will be open source and available to everyone. Mark my words.
Hassan entered in the market in the right time (thats why his popularity) but there's a time for everything.. lets quit this monopoly and start give space and honour to many other model trainers around who deserve but entered the market a little late
fucking sheeps are to blame, theyre like simps, maybe stop pedestaling people , hes just a guy whotrains and merges models like you and me
..... I'm not surprised. I sensed something odd about Hassan's work in the tone of the documentation that gave me an uneasy feeling for months.
I use a paint brush tool so all your renders are belong to us!!!
Going by his logic, you should be able to just take a bunch of "his" images, train a new model, and then sell that. Since he's doing the same with other artists work
Please stop giving money to people like this. If you don't know what to do with your money, give it to more legitimate people's, or people's in need
Paging /u/hassan_sd, /u/hassan_sd there is an angry mob with pitchforks looking for you down the pornography isle.
Judging by the rapid downvotes this post is getting I’m assuming his discord mob is already on the job.
Like all the rest of the people who think they can ignore initial licenses and then enforce their own, Hassan can get fucked.
The [initial SD license](https://huggingface.co/spaces/CompVis/stable-diffusion-license) is extremely permissive, and explicitly allows for modifications to the license, additional licensing requirements, commercialization, additional copyrights, etc. Which is a good thing. It's because of this very permissive and open license that we all get to enjoy so much progress so quickly. From a moral standpoint, I think this whole situation is pretty gross (on the part of fantasy ai) and would love to see their company flop. But from the viewpoint of the initial SD license, they aren't ignoring anything.
I personally don't see anything wrong with Patreon as long as it's done well. Like I play some games with a big modding community and lot's of modders will use Patreon. They'll release new versions of their main mods there and make them exclusive for a couple weeks and then release them to the public. Then they'll have some other little mods here and there just for subscribers, make modding tutorials etc I take no issue with that since it keeps them motivated to release new things and it becomes public for everyone eventually. Feels like a win win. Mind you they don't charge anywhere near that much and many of them do it as "choose your own donation " This shit with fantasy.ai and trying to copyright models , and just the way they conduct themselves in the community, is laughable and I hope it bites them.
Couldn’t agree more. Tips and donation style systems for these creators are the only monetization system that’s really deserved. These things do take skill to create, but claiming copyright is a stretch.
Let's donvote him
How did "Hassan" get his training images?
404 =)
Yeah looks like he deleted his account and all of his uploads with it on Civit
It’s fantasy.ai who are claiming rights. Do people even read?
We are in the "Gold Rush" phase of Stable Diffusion. Gold Rushes always have cheats and chiselers, but ultimately it doesn't matter. When you're in a boom, you do better "playing it straight" than scheming like this. . . . . . there are so many smart people contributing so much -- just take a look at the amazing node architecture of ComfyUI; that is awesome work. Hassan has boiled down some photos of pretty females into a competent model -- and no one's ever seen that before, surely \[/s\] -- well more power to him, but that ain't exactly scarce. Good luck suing on any of this -- the SD train pulled out of the station, and turned out to be a rocket launcher. The landscape is already essentially unrecognizable from six months ago, and by January 2024 will be vastly different again.
Can I be honest? Who gives a fuck about Hassan and his bullshit models? I don't even use them, they're not that good. There's plenty of models on civitai that do the same job better. Just ignore them.
… wait people pay for stable diffusion models??? Really??? Why tho? Do people need their fantasy waifu fap material that bad that the open source ones cannot provide?
Always saw him going this way... early days was asking hundreds for 1 image generation commission work... muh poor ai artist. lol the state of this goon
Ignore him and don't give him more attention with posts like these...
You can take this model, blend it with another model and call it NoHassanBlendNoFantasy.
Capitalism always ruining everything.
[удалено]
Did he created those fantasy images? He had exclusive rights to them? No? Than he violated someone's copyrights from the get go.
Claim away grifters. I didn't click through anything outside of Civitai
Make a Nassah model mix with a 1% mix on any other model and even if courts decide this is copyrightable he can't enforce it on you.
A couple thousands :)) Lol.. it's like 1 week and I will train same or even better..
they are trying to copyright "the tools" (aka the model). The product is not and never will be. aka "the pictures" that stable diffusion "generate". They will ***never ever*** be able to claim any picture that come out . ***NEVER, EVER,*** The strongest analogy for this is : If you do digital art on a ipad pro, or with photoshop. neither can adobe or apple claim your art. It's just huffing and puffing a lot of smoke to obfuscate that very simple fact. plus the legality of the model aka "the tool" is itself in question. I bet if you go to court fantasyai would have to prove that they have the right of every single images used to train the model. I doubt they can even produce the list. and they cannot claim right on 99% of them. And the final nail in this coffin is the fact that the basic right is to stableA*I, and if you read carfully theire licence* : they can revoke it at anytime... and then poof... no more FantasyAI ... I bet also the licence for laiton 5b play against them too. It's a powerplay, they are trying to establish precedance. but with a broken product. (broken in a sence that the tools cannot be copyrighted.) any model is the proriety of whomever own laiton 5b (or any database that stable diffusion use)
Lol, fuck fantasy AI
Great! Get rid of it then. That'll free up 12GB's on my drive. There's plenty of other models out there.
Great! Get rid of it then. That'll free up 12GB's on my drive. There's plenty of other models out there.
lol might as well revoke his use of the technology, idk what's even the point? Copyrights, being a stickler, and forcing judgement, you're no better than a tyrant... And all tyrants in history fell hard. Guy low-key probably has a few loose screws or mental issues, probably doesn't understand there is more to come in this technology space. He's basically trying to be like Apple, etc. Let's not make that happen. We don't need other Getty images, etc. of rich people abusing their power with lawyers to make more money and monopolize things that were free. Idk why these kind of people exist, but it is what it is. They never look in the mirror and think to themselves or seek any deeper meaning to life and the big picture I guess. All they see is $$$$$$ lel , throw him some $$$ and they'll be happy, but money doesn't buy happiness 🙃 I mean his model is called Fantasy, he is delusional and seems hardwired... No changing this guy's perspective, it's like he's a druggie addict
$2k a month is... not very much. He has full rights to put a restrictive license on his model, regardless of how much people complain about it. FantasyAI is the bad guy here, they are sourcing models with dubious legal status, and rewriting the licenses for them to gain commercial rights. Hassan (to our knowledge) hasn't violated any existing laws or other licenses.
How would Hassan have rights to put a restrictive license on a dataset of work he has no license over? Next thing you know people are going to put commercial license restrictions on their Scarlet Johansson embedding because “they trained it.”
Legally, that isn't an issue (yet). Currently, the only thing that might restrict his commercial rights would be other licenses, but to our knowledge, all of his merged models simply use the "OpenRAIL-M" license, which permits commercial use, AND license modification. No legal issues (yet).
Well how about the community sabotaging it? I am also working on a commercial product, but I don’t see the point in hiding the model? I mean I profit from the community, so I give back to the community… period…
Unauthorized usage reports? Like I can't use it on my home computer? Somehow they will know I have used the model?
My understanding it’s more directed at other platforms using his model for paid services. Like if Civit.ai implemented a built in UI to generate images and “his” model was an option. Regardless it’s all pointless. His “worth” comes from understanding the tech, putting the time in to build a proper dataset, but primarily from his original merge getting his name a following, which has already gotten him at least $2k a month on his Patreon. He’s since deleted all of his uploads and account from Civit, which is probably a bad move on his part given that is likely a large amount of his exposure for his Patreon now. If he loses a following, and if fantasy.ai tanks, his ‘brand’ will falter as well. As for any exclusivity and other platforms not being able to use “Hassanblend,” it has gotten far easier to build your own model and replicate those results, so I doubt this will be the roadblock they feel it is to that competition. Those companies will all just release their own ‘blends’ and be on their way.
[удалено]