this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
351 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

59038 readers
3057 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
 

Controversial AI art piece from 2022 lacks human authorship required for registration.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Depends on your agreement.

I think by default if there's no contract saying otherwise, the copyright stays with the original artist.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would argue that the artist produces the copyright and transfers it to you. If the artist isn't human and cant produce copyrights then it cant sell it to you. A lot of argumentation here is that we should treat AI like we treat a human artist. That is an insane line to go down because that would make any AI work effectively slavery.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hahaha, hahaha, no. That is absolutely NOT the default arrangement. Unless otherwise negotiated in the contract, the artist retains the copyright for the produced work and is free to use it as they please, including putting it in their portfolio, making further edits to the work, reusing it for other purposes, etc. The commissioner gets a copy of the finished product, but by default has few rights to use it themselves. Technically, I've personally infringed an artist's copyright by cropping a work I commissioned from them to use as an icon. However, the vast majority of artists don't typw enforce this aspect of their IP rights, due to a lack of resources and also because it would shred their reputation and kill their business.

Explicit transfer/licensure of copyright can be negotiated, but the most artists charge an extremely hefty fee for transferring the full copyright, often double or triple the price of the work itself. Most individual commissioners don't bother as a result, but commercial organizations looking to reuse the commissioned work must negotiate a license for the work in order to avoid a nasty infringement lawsuit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't know where the "Hahaha, hahaha, no" comes in. Everything I said is supported by what you said. What part of my comment isn't true?

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

The way your response was worded came across as saying that the default arrangement is the commissioner receiving the copyright for the art unless otherwise specified, not the artist. My apologies if I misinterpreted your post.