3 ms·
> Training a model on a bunch of images by {artist}, and then telling it "Generate me 20 images in the style of {artist}" seems pretty close to this ruling. No
by mjr00 3y ago
> Training a model on a bunch of images by {artist}, and then telling it "Generate me 20 images in the style of {artist}" seems pretty close to this ruling.
No, it's not close at all. Did you look at the images in question for the ruling? Warhol's picture is very clearly a tracing of the photograph. Unless you're using the AI to generate an almost-exact copy of one of the training images, this ruling does not apply.
- freejazz 3y agoThe decision is not an infringement decision. AWF did not dispute the finding that the images are substantially similar.
- judge2020 3y ago> The decision is not an infringement decision > Supreme Court rules Andy Warhol’s Prince art is copyright infringement And fair use is the main exemption to copyright, and that was decided here.
- freejazz 3y agoNo it wasn't decided there. There is no analysis as to whether the image is infringing or not and it's not even a debate, because the warhol foundation admitted the pictures were substantially similar.
- Dylan16807 3y agoEven better for AI, then, if the supreme court was divided on whether such a small change is a valid use even with similarity assumed.