4 ms·
Independent of whether one thinks AI generated images are really art, I feel like they are getting very good at simulating "inspiration" and other indirect ways
by gedy 4y ago
Independent of whether one thinks AI generated images are really art, I feel like they are getting very good at simulating "inspiration" and other indirect ways of copying other artists and their styles. I think the last thing we need to do is start incorporating copyright and other filters into these models to filter out content.
This just empowers others to control and monopolize content, worse than today.
- revicon 4y agoAgreed, per the article “ style and a ‘look and feel’ are not copyrightable”
- Hemospectrum 4y agoI wonder if they can be trademarked. If not now, maybe later.
- nl 4y agoYes they probably can be trademarked. But a big question is why? Trademarks are very expensive. It makes sense for a company logo that was AI generated, but spending 100K+ for very limited protection of a piece of art seems questionable.
- verdverm 4y agoTrademarks are actually much cheaper than that, I paid a few thousand dollars for mine. The price range your quoting is more typical of patents
- nl 4y agoWas it international? And in how many categories? It adds up very quickly.
- clcaev 4y agoYou can lose your trademark if you do not actively enforce violations. Hence, the full cost of a trademark should include its legal maintenance.
- verdverm 4y agothat is an unknown quantity which one cannot estimate
- surfacedetail 4y agoIt's more difficult to trademark stuff like style, there are certain rules of what can be trademarked; long story short, non-graphical representations need to be clear, precise, self-contained, easily accessible, intelligible, durable and objective. Trademark also gives a more limited protection in some ways.