It is almost perfectly clear cut. LAION is linking to the images, not redistributing them or storing them. A link. In a text file. To photos. Served from a web server. Presumably, the artist's web server or portfolio site hosted by a company they do business with.
>The person created those pictures, and has the right to distribute them as they see fit.
Yeah, they do have the right to distribute them as they see fit. So, if they don't want them linked to, they can put them behind a paywall.
It's a bullshit legal threat. The artist has a complete knuckle dragging understanding of copyright and the web.
Again its not clear cut. the license could be something like: "you are able to view these images as part of this website, anything else is prohibited" or "direct linking to these images is not allowed, these images are licensed only fir use as part of this website" or something along those lines.
Now, enforcing that is pretty hard. I'm also willing to bet that he didn't make any such license. But to say its a clear cut legal slam dunk isn't correct.
It is almost perfectly clear cut. LAION is linking to the images, not redistributing them or storing them. A link. In a text file. To photos. Served from a web server. Presumably, the artist's web server or portfolio site hosted by a company they do business with.
>The person created those pictures, and has the right to distribute them as they see fit.
Yeah, they do have the right to distribute them as they see fit. So, if they don't want them linked to, they can put them behind a paywall.
It's a bullshit legal threat. The artist has a complete knuckle dragging understanding of copyright and the web.