3 ms·
I’m guessing that the copyright equivalent is whether the editor of someone else’s photograph or the director of a photo shoot should have copyright privileges.
by tyre 4y ago
I’m guessing that the copyright equivalent is whether the editor of someone else’s photograph or the director of a photo shoot should have copyright privileges. The answer is pretty clearly not.
It’s not that she didn’t do (a lot) of work, but that the creation of the underlying work happened by AI. If it were human then it would hold the copyright, but it’s not so it doesn’t. The logical misstep is thinking, “because it can’t have copyright, someone else can.”
- circuit10 4y agoBut then by this logic photos shouldn’t have copyright either because a camera can’t hold copyright I think prompting the AI is like taking a photo in that you set the parameters and subject and press the button to get an image
- pcthrowaway 4y agoExactly, generative AI, like the camera, is just a fancy way of transforming ideas from the real-world into a digital representation, but with a lot more parameters.