3 ms·
> First, a human didn’t create it, so copyright protections don’t exist on its output. Machines don’t enjoy copyright protections, people do. This is not corre
by tticvs 3y ago
> First, a human didn’t create it, so copyright protections don’t exist on its output. Machines don’t enjoy copyright protections, people do.
This is not correct. AI models are tools that humans use.
This is like saying "it was typed on a computer therefore it doesn't enjoy copyright protections"
- 8note 3y agoThis has a ruling, see https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2023/05/04/us-copyright-office-artificial-intelligence-art-regulation https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2023/05/04/us-copyright-offi... When you're using ai models to generate the art, it's not considered human enough. If you then make a bunch of modifications to it, sure, but giving the initial prompt is currently insufficient
- tticvs 3y ago> The Copyright Office granted copyright to the book as a whole but not to the individual images in the book Interesting and makes sense. I guess the best comparison I can think of is a random number generated with Math.random() is not copyrightable. But including that random number is a program is copyrightable. I'd say that a corollary to this is that if the images/words generated by the machine are not copyrightable then they cannot also be _copyright violations_