I wonder if the whole #AI thing will finally convince artists that modern #copyright regime was never meant to protect *them*.

It was meant to protect the middlemen. The Amazons, the Spotifies, the Sonys, the Disneys. The film studios, the publishing houses.

Now the middlemen figured out they own basically all of art, and that they can just train a computer on that, to replace artists with a piece of software.

And then stop paying artists even the pittance they were being paid so far.

🧵

Courtney Love hit the nail on the head years and years ago:
https://www.gerryhemingway.com/piracy

> Today I want to talk about piracy and music. What is piracy? Piracy is the act of stealing an artist's work without any intention of paying for it. I'm not talking about Napster-type software. I'm talking about major label recording contracts.

Now the same companies that had cried "protect the artists!" to extend copyright over and over again are salivating at the thought of replacing artists with software.

Piracy in the Music Business-Courtney Love

Artists now realize they had signed the rights to their own work over to middlemen, who use that very work to try replacing them.

When they signed these contracts, often years ago, there was no talk of "AIs" able to "generate content". That was not even on the horizon.

"We have altered the deal. Pray we don't alter it any further."

Would they have signed these contracts if that was clearly stated in the terms? Well, if the WGA strike is any indication, I'd wager a bet the answer is "no".

I hope this becomes a wake-up call to all #artists, to all creative people out there — a wake-up call not just about #AI and automatically generated content, but also, and more importantly, about how urgently we need solid #copyright reform.

We had been needing it for decades, in fact.

#Art is not supposed to be hoarded by Disneys or Sonys, not supposed to be locked in corporate vaults. Art is more than just means of "maximizaing shareholder value".

#Artists cannot be replaced by some software. But it will take corporate execs a few years to learn it the hard way.

Meanwhile, artists will be hurting, bad. They will need our support — they always did!

So support them directly, if you can. Boost their toots on here, buy their merch, donate to them via whatever means they accept, or just send in a good word.

♦️♦️♦️

As this seems to be blowing up, a call to #art: this is now a "share your art" thread. I shall boost, if alt-text is provided. 💜

@rysiek copyright was originally designed to encourage artists to create more. Now it doesn't do that very well. It hasn't for a while. There's still a lot of creating because people don't just create for money. How are you proposing it be fixed?
@DanielTuttle @rysiek There is already the concept of "authors moral rights"; extend that. You use someones work/performance to derive a wholly new version, they've got the right to prohibit that because it's not them performing- unless they give specific consent (for payment if that is their condition). And all studios etc generating new works need the paperwork to prove consent, just like porn studios need proof of age for all their performers.
@HighlandLawyer @rysiek right, but AI work is derivative
@DanielTuttle @rysiek Precisely, so any business creating it ought to be obliged to have the consent of the original author/artist/performer before being able to release it
@HighlandLawyer @rysiek copyright law allows derivative works

@DanielTuttle as far as I understand AI companies are using "data-mining exception" in the EU to go around copyright and claim AI-generated works are not to be treated as derivative works.

Disclosure, I lobbied *for* that exception, because it is crucial for things like science, investigative journalism, etc. It was never meant to be used in a way that AI companies use it (that is, to create new works of the same order, so to speak), and I believe this needs to be fixed ASAP.

@HighlandLawyer

@DanielTuttle @rysiek Copyright law reserves the authority to make adaptations, arrangement, & alterations of literary or artistic works to the author (Berne Convention Art 12).
(Art 14(2) reserves rights to original author even when a cinematic version has been created)
IOW, derivative works require permission of the original works copyright owner.