syzygy wrote: ↑
Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:02 pm
hgm wrote: ↑
Mon Aug 13, 2018 8:54 pm
Note that he said the training set
was a database, not the NN.
Ah, you're right. I completely misread the post I responded to.
To clarify, the point I wanted to emphasize is that the copyright of the data does not transfer to the NN. In the example of Bob Dylan's songs it is necessary to acquire the rights to use them, but the NN does not become a copyright of Bob Dylan.
But I did not mean to imply that there can never be a copyright / patent on an NN.
For example, in weather forecast, the software analyzes some data and creates animated images from them. There is no copyright on the forecast, but there is on the images because they present the data in an original way.
The same applies in my opinion to a high-quality list of pseudo-random numbers, there is no copyright on a single number, but the list represents an original work that is protected by copyright.
I do not think it is possible to say that an NN is never or is always covered by copyright or that is not patentable.
It is a complex subject with many variables. The NN may be created in a proprietary codec (like with video codecs for example), or the software that uses the NN may have a license that prohibits the use of unapproved NNs, the process of creating the NN may not be completely automated, etc ...