3 ms·
I got this question a lot about my StyleGAN anime faces & GPT-2-small poetry: https://www.gwern.net/Faces#faq https://www.gwern.net/Faces#faq The legal consens
by gwern 8y ago
I got this question a lot about my StyleGAN anime faces & GPT-2-small poetry: https://www.gwern.net/Faces#faq https://www.gwern.net/Faces#faq
The legal consensus, such as it is, seems to be that (if you did not otherwise agree to a contract/license modifying this in arbitrary ways) you create a new copyright & own it if you use their music-editing tool to tweak settings until you got something you liked, because you are exercising creative control, making choices, and engaging in labor. On the other hand, if you merely generated a random sample, neither you nor anyone else own a copyright on it.
- occamschainsaw 8y agoHow do you prove that too? Maybe in the future somebody creates a random painting in FuturePaintGAN(TM)+3DCanvasPrinter(TM) that moves millions of people to tears and sells for hundreds of thousands in some auction house. Is that their IP? What if that person is a monkey[1]? Is it "animal-made art"[2]? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Brassau https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Brassau [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal-made_art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal-made_art
- gwern 8y agoHow do you prove anything to a court about who owns a copyright? You present what evidence you have and marshal what arguments you can, and hope that the person in the right prevails. As your own links indicate, animals have no more copyrights any more than a computer program would because they are not human, and copyright is explicitly granted to human creative efforts.