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

Technology

59038 readers
3148 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] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To what degree do you consider AI involvement to be the deal-breaker. My phone uses something arbitrarily akin to generative AI to sharpen photos. If I take a photo with my phone of something novel, should I be able to copywrite that photo?

If I use an AI generated image and spend 24 hours manually tweaking and modifying it, do I have a right to copywrite?

If I use an LLM to synthesize an idea that I then use to organically create art, is it lesser art?

It all seems so arbitrary at this point. It's like a typist in 2005 arguing that digital word processors shouldn't be used to create copywritable art, as it takes significantly less work.

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

To what degree do you consider AI involvement to be the deal-breaker.

In one sentence, when you're editing the AI's work rather than the AI editing your's, you can't claim the original work as your's.

My phone uses something arbitrarily akin to generative AI to sharpen photos. If I take a photo with my phone of something novel, should I be able to copywrite that photo?

This being an example if the former... The AI is sharpening your photo that you took.

If I use an AI generated image and spend 24 hours manually tweaking and modifying it, do I have a right to copywrite?

Assuming it was transformative enough, I'm sure you could copyright your derivative work, but you couldn't then directly copyright what the AI generated.

If I use an LLM to synthesize an idea that I then use to organically create art, is it lesser art?

No, because like an artist taking requests, the AI is providing the prompt. You'd be the one drawing the art piece, putting in the majority of the creative effort.

It all seems so arbitrary at this point. It’s like a typist in 2005 arguing that digital word processors shouldn’t be used to create copywritable art, as it takes significantly less work.

Excuse my French, but how in the flying fuck is that the same thing?

Whether you write a document on a typewriter or keyboard, you're still the one directly deciding what words go on that page, and in what order. Every creative decision it is possible to make, you make.

When an AI writes for you based on prompts, you decide almost none of that. You give it a synopsis and it writes the whole script, essay, whatever for you.

There's a huge difference between those things! How is it so hard to grasp that?