> you know collages are legal right Only if it’s sufficiently transformative. There was recently a case that hit the US Supreme Court about this subject regard

> you know collages are legal right Only if it’s sufficiently transformative. There was recently a case that hit the US Supreme Court about this subject regarding an Andy Warhol adaptation of a portrait of Prince [1]. So, in the US, fair use in this regard requires some amount of substantive transformation of the material. But, as we are talking about AI algorithms, there isn’t a person in between the model and the training data. The argument here is whether or not a person is required to make a transformative use of the material (and thus fair use applies). Given that AI generated (and non-human animal generated) works aren’t copyrightable due to the lack of human involvement, I’d wager that any AI use of copyrighted material won’t get fair use protections. [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/05/what-supreme-courts-decision-warhol-means-fair-use https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/05/what-supreme-courts-de...