3 ms·
>if I write a style parody of William Shakespeare and add a '--Willy Shakespeare' at the end to round it off, have I revealed that I have secretly copied his wo
by pbhjpbhj 4y ago
>if I write a style parody of William Shakespeare and add a '--Willy Shakespeare' at the end to round it off, have I revealed that I have secretly copied his work? //
I doubt you're suggesting SD, Dall-E, etc., are producing parodies so bringing in parody considerations muddies the water a lot. Also, Shakespeare's works are out of copyright.
If you sell a painting signed with a [facsimile] signature of Dali then it's pretty hard to say you didn't copy the signature, as a minimum. Thats likely to be a trademark violation too. Now, suppose you include aspects in the image specifically associated with the artist, and a signature, ... there's no way to genuinely deny that is a derivative.
- theptip 4y ago> a painting signed with a [facsimile] signature of Dali That's not what's happening here though. If you look at the original tweet (https://twitter.com/LaurynIpsum/status/1599953586699767808 https://twitter.com/LaurynIpsum/status/1599953586699767808) it seems that the complaint is about the "mangled remains of an artist’s signature". I don't see any examples where it's actually copying the signature of a specific artist. (Please do share an example of that if there is one.)
- return_to_monke 4y agoI do respect artist's concerns. I have a hard time getting this one though. The ai learned that humans usually put squiggly lines in the corners, and it does, too. What is wrong with this?
- Filligree 4y agoIt's reasoning based on a false assumption. If you start from the assumption that AI imagery is based on specific source images, which had signatures, then it can make sense to assume that the squiggly lines in the corner are evidence that it copied-and-mangled some such specific pictures. That's not what it did, of course. But if you start from the assumption...