5 ms·
This seems to work only with people that will admin and probably promote their works as AI generated, other people will probably argue how the image or text was
by GaggiX 3y ago
This seems to work only with people that will admin and probably promote their works as AI generated, other people will probably argue how the image or text was actually modified enough by the human to grant him the copyright.
Also I don't understand why pressing a button on a camera is so different than writing a prompt and pressing a button, one clearly grants you human authorship the other is disputed.
- tedajax 3y agoBecause the "generated" art is more accurately described as "stolen".
- GaggiX 3y agoThere is nothing accurate about describe it as "stolen", no one is depriving you of your art when training a model, like no human is depriving you of your art when learning from it.
- cjbgkagh 3y agoWhile I wouldn’t describe AI art as stolen I do think it’s fair to claim there has been a loss of potential earning from the creative work that went into developing a style and the marketing that went into evangelizing/popularizing it.
- johngladtj 3y agoThe same applies when another human does it
- tester457 3y agoGreat difference in scale, humans cannot automate at nearly the level machines can. The law will have to account for this.
- EMIRELADERO 3y ago> Also I don't understand why pressing a button on a camera is so different than writing a prompt and pressing a button, one clearly grants you human authorship the other is disputed. In the case of a camera, you know how the pohotgraph will turn out. You set and positioned the camera in a specific, creative way to ensure that composition. In the case of an AI, it's not the paintbrush, it's the painter. The prompts serve less as arms to a brush and more as instructions to a commissioned artist.
- GaggiX 3y ago>you know how the pohotgraph will turn out So if I stick out the camera from a corner then I don't own the copyright because I don't know how the photograph will turn out, if that's not case then I should own the copyright of an AI generated image because in both cases I have an approximate understanding of what the image would be.
- EMIRELADERO 3y agoWith AI, you control the idea but you have no understanding of the creative expression that will result from entering a prompt.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- dragonwriter 3y agoWith the simplest, one-shot, prompt-only workflow, sure, that might be a reasonable approximation of the truth.
- minimaxir 3y agoWith just a text prompt, no. But there are an increasing number of ways to use human decision-making to strongly and evidently control the outputs (LoRAs, ControlNet, Img2Img) that haven't been legally tested yet.
- lowdest 3y ago
- anigbrowl 3y agoAlso I don't understand why pressing a button on a camera is so different Take any good digital came, switch it on, and press the button. Do you get a great photograph? No, because you haven't even removed the lens cap. Photography is not about pressing the button, it's about where you point the camera and how you configure it before you push the button.
- GaggiX 3y agoIt doesn't matter where you point the camera to own the copyright unless you're violating other laws like privacy laws I would imagine.
- regularfry 3y agoOwnership of copyright isn't the question. Existence of it is.
- GaggiX 3y agoOkay and we can agree that with photography copyright exists even if it just requires the press of button.
- regularfry 3y agoNo, we can't. It requires creative input, not mechanical curation.
- GaggiX 3y agoSo you don't believe that if I take a picture right now I would own the copyright from it? Because that's not how it works.
- regularfry 3y agoIt depends. It's not automatic. That's the point.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> Also I don't understand why pressing a button on a camera is so different than writing a prompt and pressing a button, one clearly grants you human authorship the other is disputed. This case was analogous to claiming the camera as the author, and the photographer as a copyright owner only because the camera did the work as a work for hire. Which would also fail.