3 ms·
> Content that is entirely generated [...] Take note of the qualifier entirely. If you're working with an agent steering it to produce the results you want, it
by sva_ 1mo ago
> Content that is entirely generated [...]
Take note of the qualifier entirely. If you're working with an agent steering it to produce the results you want, it would be an entirely different story.
- colordrops 1mo agoWhere is this qualification in the legal language?
- _aavaa_ 1mo agoWhere is the legal language?
- colordrops 1mo agoExactly, I don't know how the person I was replying to was making such confident statements about the situation.
- _aavaa_ 1mo agoI think that’s simple. The submitted title is more absolute than the thing it leads to. The article is talking about content that’s exclusively generated by AI. That’s very different than work that contains, or is derived from, AI output, or anything along those lines.
- pizzly 1mo agoWheres the limit. Would a prompt "Create a system that does x" and no other feedback count? Or do need to do 10 prompts to steer your agent to the results you want. What about just 1 additional prompt. Somewhere there will be a line.
- oblio 1mo agoLegal systems are fuzzy. The limit will be what courtrooms decide. There will never be a ">75% of content" law, everything will be left to interpretation, laws are not source code.
- koolala 1mo agoIs working with an agent different than constantly editing an image with fine tuning prompts? Both can be entirely generated.
- dijksterhuis 1mo agoa bit further down ... > Neither mere prompting nor the selection between several AI suggestions is sufficient as a human creative contribution. which reads like you actually have to contribute by modifying the output from the system, i.e. prompts/inputs to the system do not count as a human contribution.
- dgellow 1mo agoIf you modify the output, you don’t magically get copyright on the whole output, only the section you modified
- dijksterhuis 1mo agoif you modify enough of the output as to make it unrecognizable as the machine output -- that's a new work created by a human. i.e. you don't have to change every line. same thing applies to sampling in music. if i change enough of a sample as to make it unrecognizable, then i don't need to worry about registering/licensing the sample.
- dgellow 1mo agoYeah, but then you end up more or let rewriting the LLM output, which defeats the purpose of using agents, no?
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- dijksterhuis 1mo agofor anything you want to be able to copyright, yes. otherwise you can still prompt your agent things, but any output falls under public domain. since this hype wave started some people have been saying don’t use these tools in an environment where you’re dealing with proprietary IP. did anyone listen? no. because shiny.
- enquirewithin 1mo agoMore importantly, take note of: > Munich Local Court has held that Local Court in Germany is the equivalent of the Magistrates Court in the UK or Australia. Definitely not the arbiter of ultimate truth.