Ars TechnicaOpinion: Don’t exclude AI-generated art from copyright
A rule against copyrighting AI art will be unworkable.
Ministerofimpediments@arstechnica the article completely misses the point. The issue is that the work was not solely created by a specific tool under the direction of an artist (a brush, camera, or MS Paint), nor was the artist assisted by another ‘person’ as the “AI” is not a true AI but simply an amalgamation of other works that the tool reproduces in some part.
The work is more akin to a mural painted by other artists by direction, or a symphony performance…both without attribution/agreement of the other artists.
The work is more akin to a mural painted by other artists by direction, or a symphony performance…both without attribution/agreement of the other artists.
@arstechnica it would be akin to showing up at a programmer’s convention, setting up a booth, and asking attendees to each write a snippet of code based on your direction/framework. Then calling the resulting program ‘yours’.
Except not only do you not know who wrote for you, you didn’t actually ask them, or pay them, or acknowledge them…other existing work was reused without consent.
Because the AI model works the way it does he cannot say it was a unique work…he created an instruction set.
Except not only do you not know who wrote for you, you didn’t actually ask them, or pay them, or acknowledge them…other existing work was reused without consent.
Because the AI model works the way it does he cannot say it was a unique work…he created an instruction set.