Mastodawn

Cliff Jones Jr.Jan 15, 2023

The U.S. Copyright Office is holding firm that AI-generated artwork is ineligible for copyright.

https://www.cbr.com/ai-comic-deemed-ineligible-copyright-protection/

#ai #aiArt #aiArtCommunity #aiArtwork #comics #media #art #artwork #artistsOfMastodon #indieArtists #artistsOnMastodon #comicArt #comicArtists #copyright

Show thread

cshotton Jan 16, 2023

@cliffjones This is a slippery slope. Where does AI generated end and really fancy Photoshop enhancement plugin output begin? I mean, if a Campbell's soup can label with a few splashes of color can be copyrighted, why can't some prompt image that's been doodled on by an AI get the same treatment? What if *I* write the software that runs the "AI" algorithm? Who decides if it is "AI" or just a generative art algorithm? This seems absolutely arbitrary and unsupportable as a decision.

Show thread

Cliff Jones Jr.Jan 16, 2023

@cshotton I'd say it all depends on the data that's fed into the software to teach it. That needs to be completely transparent. None of this shady stuff like DeviantArt pulled where artists had to work fed to the AI by default. They changed their policy to where now you have to "opt in," but the damage has kind of been done.

Anyway, as is the case with most technological advancements, this whole thing is both extremely exciting and horrifying. That's what sci-fi is all about, you know?

Show thread

cshotton

@cliffjones I'm not too worried about stuff like ChatGPT, either. These sorts of generative applications are only as good as the data they are trained on (I'm purposefully not saying "AI", because there's no "I", really.) Regardless of how good they are at generating stuff, it will always require humans to evaluate and analyze whatever it is they create. And humans have to create all the new content. Otherwise it's just software navel-gazing its own output.