this initial 'ai-originated works are owned by noone' policy may end up feeling a bit silly in the long run, but it seems refreshingly reasonable at least as a

this initial 'ai-originated works are owned by noone' policy may end up feeling a bit silly in the long run, but it seems refreshingly reasonable at least as a stop-gap for a largely novel class of creation, though i hope if it comes to it that the next decision gets the public attention and scrutiny it deserves. though i would guess that currently copyright-blackholed content might be able to be retroactively registered under future rules, i wonder how this 'ai-generated material must be disclaimed in a registration application' concept works against the 'implicit copyright' protection that i imagine most software is assumed to be under? i haven't heard much about great pains being taken to track which fragments of 'expressive material' might have 'ai-origin', other than the apparent fringe proclaiming that we ought to be..