3 ms·

(IANAL) Given the US Copyright Office's guidance on the lack of protection for AI generated art, doesn't this tool harm the ability of artists/photographers/age

by akeck 3y ago

(IANAL) Given the US Copyright Office's guidance on the lack of protection for AI generated art, doesn't this tool harm the ability of artists/photographers/agencies to protect their works? Will people starting blanket stealing of content using the "It was AI generated." defense?

alphanullmeric 3y ago
[flagged]
- dang 3y ago
  (This is not a reply to the current comment, I just want to make sure you see this, so I'm replying to the most recent thing you posted.) Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
  - alphanullmeric 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - dang 3y ago
      As I mentioned, my post was not about your specific comment there but rather to your account's overall pattern of breaking the site guidelines. I chose to reply to your most recent comment only because that would be the most likely place you would see it. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here from now on, we'd appreciate it.
      - alphanullmeric 3y ago
        I’m asking because I’d like to know if comments of that nature are considered rule breaking.
        dang 3y ago
        If you're asking whether https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36146358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36146358 broke the site guidelines, I guess it was a borderline case. It wasn't very substantive but I don't think it was a swipe. It would have been better if you had explained what you meant more.
xoa 3y ago
Lack of copyright for "AI generated art" applies to fully AI generated art, ie, give pure text, get image. Merely using AI as one part of an overall human done composition or work, like to help fill in some cropping or backgrounds, isn't going to then negate everything else. So no if anything use in this kind of context would be one of the likely copyright preserving ones (unless it was abused to the point of legally negligible artist involvement). Granted sure, if there was a serious lawsuit I'm sure going forward defense lawyers would do discovery to try to see if it was AI generated or not. But if it wasn't, then it'd be pretty trivial to show the original Photoshop (or whatever) files and where, if anywhere, AI was used and that it was just one part of a human created composition and that'd be that.

by akeck 3y ago

alphanullmeric 3y ago

[flagged]

dang 3y ago
(This is not a reply to the current comment, I just want to make sure you see this, so I'm replying to the most recent thing you posted.) Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
- alphanullmeric 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - dang 3y ago
    As I mentioned, my post was not about your specific comment there but rather to your account's overall pattern of breaking the site guidelines. I chose to reply to your most recent comment only because that would be the most likely place you would see it. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here from now on, we'd appreciate it.
    - alphanullmeric 3y ago
      I’m asking because I’d like to know if comments of that nature are considered rule breaking.
      - dang 3y ago
        If you're asking whether https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36146358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36146358 broke the site guidelines, I guess it was a borderline case. It wasn't very substantive but I don't think it was a swipe. It would have been better if you had explained what you meant more.

xoa 3y ago

Lack of copyright for "AI generated art" applies to fully AI generated art, ie, give pure text, get image. Merely using AI as one part of an overall human done composition or work, like to help fill in some cropping or backgrounds, isn't going to then negate everything else. So no if anything use in this kind of context would be one of the likely copyright preserving ones (unless it was abused to the point of legally negligible artist involvement). Granted sure, if there was a serious lawsuit I'm sure going forward defense lawyers would do discovery to try to see if it was AI generated or not. But if it wasn't, then it'd be pretty trivial to show the original Photoshop (or whatever) files and where, if anywhere, AI was used and that it was just one part of a human created composition and that'd be that.