10
What do you think of the ruling today that AI art can't be copyrighted?
(www.reuters.com)
Community for asking and answering any question related to the life, the people or anything related to the USA. Non-US people are welcome to provide their perspective! Please keep in mind:
My understanding is that it's still (technically) correct. If you generate an image and then edit it yourself, only your edits will have copyright. Basically, you can have a copyright on the diff, but not the original
The US Copyright Office made a report about copyrightability of AI works a while back: https://copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf
So, you can have copyright if you used an AI to assist in the production of a work -- not just on edits -- but case-by-case judgement is needed.
But who knows what rules this could be changed to have to follow, potentially even mere days to weeks from now.
Nothing is certain anymore, in regards to the USA governmental functions.
(Edit: test edit, please ignore this.)
Sure, and if the Unhinged States of America decides to toss copyright completely overboard in its current thrashing, well, I won't be complaining. 🫠️
Until we hear otherwise though, I'll assume the findings of the Copyright Office are correct. They seem reasonable enough given current tech and the assumption that copyright does continue to exist.
I imagine that the copyright office is too boring when for Nazis to touch, but I've been wrong before.