4 ms·
From the opinion, as quoted in the article: > “AWF [Andy Warhol Foundation] contends that the Prince Series works are ‘transformative,’ and that the first fair
by btown 3y ago
From the opinion, as quoted in the article:
> “AWF [Andy Warhol Foundation] contends that the Prince Series works are ‘transformative,’ and that the first fair use factor thus weighs in AWF’s favor, because the works convey a different meaning or message than the photograph. But the first fair use factor instead focuses on whether an allegedly infringing use has a further purpose or different character, which is a matter of degree, and the degree of difference must be weighed against other considerations, like commercialism."
It seems like there's a strong possibility that if you use any tool, but especially an automated tool, explicitly to generate work "based on Artist Name's work" and then you try to sell it for substantially the same purpose as Artist Name's original work with an explicit goal to avoid the commercial ramifications of licensing those rights from Artist Name, then the courts might not see that as fair use under this new precedent.
This is immensely important, say, if Artist Name is a writer that a studio is trying to replace while maintaining their style by asking an AI to mimic their style, or an actor where the studio wants to use an AI-generated likeness in place of paying them. And of course, this means that studios will try to get these creators to sign their rights away explicitly - which makes some of the current collective action all that much more important!
- pmoriarty 3y agoBut the case wasn't about the style of the photographer, but the close resemblance to that particular photo.
- greiskul 3y agoNot close resemblance. Copying. Andy Warhol didn't happen to paint it similar to that photo. If he had, there wouldn't haven been a case, since copyright doesn't cover independent creation. Andy Warhol painted it by copying the photo.
- bioemerl 3y agoSeems like a stretch to me. An AI tool doesn't just recolor an existing image, it generates nearly entirely novel ones.
- jayzalowitz 3y agoNot really, its trained on the previous object to recreate said object given outside changes... it very much is the same thing as warhol doing it with his brain based NN recreating it with "do a prince portrait, but orange"
- davorak 3y ago> Not really, its trained on the previous object to recreate said object given outside changes... All generative AI packages, that I know of, are not going to use material only from one artist even when generating something in that artists style. In general it is more than for example tracing a photo and coloring it differently. Just like artists can copy the style and techniques of another artist(often several) and generate something original, current generative AI, often, seem to do something similar. I am not saying that the current generative AI can not produce copy righted work, but it is not obvious to me that if the original dataset is all copyrighted that all output retain those copyrights, though it seems likely select output could.
- usrbinbash 3y ago> to recreate said object given outside changes... Unless we're talking about something other than diffusion models, the new image is generated from initial random noise. It also doesn't "recreate" parts of it's training data, unless the model was overfitted to a particular work, or the prompt is deliberately designed to do so, or the user is running it in img2img mode against a preexisting work.
- sacrosancty 3y ago[dead]
- kevinmchugh 3y ago> an actor where the studio wants to use an AI-generated likeness in place of paying them Likeness rights are separate and cover this pretty well I think. There's not legal precedent yet over AI specifically but Waits v Frito Lay and Crispin Glover's back to the future 2 lawsuit lay a groundwork. Disney recently bought the rights to digitally recreate James Earl Jones' Darth Vader voice using AI. I think Disney's army of copyright lawyers probably they're likely to need that, even though they own the Darth Vader character and have had others perform it, without (afaik) paying him anything.