Prohibit Generative AI from learning on Terms of Service,

[lamrongol]

This is not bug but urgent agenda so I created this issue as 'bug'.
Twitter/X is in talks with Midjourney for a potential partnership. No arts on Twitter/X will be protected.
https://twitter.com/cb_doge/status/1759798475959771493

At least, it is desirable to protect arts on Bluesky by Terms of Service.
https://bsky.social/about/support/tos

[aetos382]

What does "art" mean? Does it mean only pictures?
If Generative AI is broadly banned, for example, bots or feeds that learn texts posted on Bluesky could also be banned.
Even if it were to be prohibited, the scope should be more restricted.

[Bossett]

Isn't this already protected by 2(c) and 2(d)?

Bluesky doesn't have the license to provide material to third parties for the purposes of anything except "(a) providing Bluesky Social and Content, including by sharing User Content throughout Bluesky Social and the AT Protocol as well as developing and improving our current and future offerings; and (b) promoting and marketing Bluesky and Bluesky Social."

[lamrongol]

@aetos382 "art" usually means pictures and voices and music and movies(like an attached image) but if text is included, prohibiting "learning" of ONLY "generative AI" impact will be small(or profit is bigger than loss).

@Bossett I'm not familiar with English but it seems to define only "use by Bluesky", if you're right, it is more desirable to declare prohibiting "learning of Generative AI".

[tigeryfan]

bluesky-social/atproto#2536 (comment)
Can we do a ToS revision to prohibit AI scraping?

[surfdude29]

If any ToS revision is made it would have to be very carefully worded. I would not want to see any ToS revision prohibit the use of tools such as @aendra-rininsland's excellent XBlock, for example, which uses machine learning to categorise screenshots.

[lamrongol]

I think prohibiting only "publishing" data (for example, on Hugging Face) is sufficiently effective. Although this may be already prohibited.