this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
641 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

59622 readers
3246 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
641
Everything Made By an AI Is In the Public Domain (doctorow.medium.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
139 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The US Copyright Office offers creative workers a powerful labor protective.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's going to raise some interesting issues when a studio decides to commision an AI programmer / artist to feed AI some exacting prompts to closely reproduce someobe else's copyrighted work.

There are still genies at large out of their bottles wreaking havoc.

The funny thing is hobbyists might be able to do the same thing given that we currently have access to very effective AI tools.

It will also raise questions if an editor goes over AI created material and makes changes. Does he get to copyright it?

Personally, I think no IP law is better than the system of IP laws we have (about which judges routinely make bad rulings out of ignorance). So I'll be glad to see it broken. I creative commons my own stuff anyway.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

It’s going to raise some interesting issues when a studio decides to commision an AI programmer / artist to feed AI some exacting prompts to closely reproduce someobe else’s copyrighted work.

What is the difference if they hire someone to use photoshop to reproduce someone else's copyrighted work? Why would a case involving an AI be any different? Just because you create something and release it to the public domain does not mean you have the right to actually do that if what you created violates copyright.

It will also raise questions if an editor goes over AI created material and makes changes. Does he get to copyright it?

Same question can be applied to any public domain works. AI generated or not.

But also the articles title is wrong, AI generated works are not uncopyrightable - only ones that don't involve any human input (much like any other work that does not involve any human input).

Personally, I think no IP law is better than the system of IP laws we have (about which judges routinely make bad rulings out of ignorance). So I’ll be glad to see it broken. I creative commons my own stuff anyway.

I agree with this though. But this case does not break the system at all. It just re-enforces precedents that have already been established for non ai works - in that a human needs to be part of the creative process for the work to be copyrightable. Articles reporting on this case are just going for the most clickbait title they can.