3 ms·
"You can also get “the whole work” by asking another human to recite the lyrics to a song or draw the Finder logo from memory." You seem to be speaking as if t
by jerf 3y ago
"You can also get “the whole work” by asking another human to recite the lyrics to a song or draw the Finder logo from memory."
You seem to be speaking as if this somehow would cleanse the copyright status of the work in question, but it wouldn't. If you memorize a book, or a friend does, and your or your friend recite it to someone who transcribes it, the result is still copyrighted by the original entity, and if you try to sell the result, you'll be on the hook for copyright violation. This would do nothing to the copyright status whatsoever, so whatever argument you're trying to imply doesn't hold.
- Spivak 3y agoThe only difference between the two cases is which human violated copyright. If you ask a musician to play a cover of a famous song without the requisite royalties they violated copyright. If you instruct a machine to do it you violated copyright. Machine has no thoughts, head empty, does not know what copyright is, does not know abc's. Which is also why machines can't create copyrighted works either. The standard example is that making a machine to generate random images doesn't copyright them, but if an artist chooses some of them because they look good then he may copyright them.