> The courts have decided that a human simply gathering a bunch of AI images into a kids book was "enough work" for the kids book to be copyrightable. Yes, the

> The courts have decided that a human simply gathering a bunch of AI images into a kids book was "enough work" for the kids book to be copyrightable. Yes, the book is, the images aren't. > Courts are dangerously close to deciding that any diffusion model being used as part of the images creative process would nullify the ability to copyright it. I honestly think it should. Generative AI can't exist without public domain/unlicensed work. Even if your Lora is 100% copyrighted/personal work, most of the images that constitute the model are public property. Sale with any stuff written by ChatGPT, or any code by copilot. All should be open-source or public domain,at least. To me it should even be copyleft,so the book (to come back to it) should be public domain too.