Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Copyright Registration Guidance: Works containing material generated by AI

federalregister.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 415 posts

Re: Copyright Registration Guidance: Works containing material generated by AI

#91

Post by bawolff »

kevingadd wrote: post #37
famouswaffles wrote: post #17

Not possible to reliably tell apart. The Image generation scene is one thing. For a lot of output, there are still some tells. Text generation though...well good luck ever finding that out.

It sounds like the honor system, which is not unprecedented. A lot of governmental systems rely on people to tell the truth when interacting with the government, and then they have to police cases of suspected fraud after the fact. If you were dragged into a copyright suit by someone, you could probably try to prove that the work was AI generated as a defense? Not sure how effective it would be.

> If you were dragged into a copyright suit by someone, you could probably try to prove that the work was AI generated as a defense? Not sure how effective it would be.

It would probably be similar to when wordperfect was sued for including famous painting as clipart. WordPerfect won using basically this defense (that no human creativity went into making the clip art) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Cor....

Re: Copyright Registration Guidance: Works containing material generated by AI

#92

Post by Wowfunhappy »

tantalor wrote: post #42
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on this reasoning, does that mean that you could not claim copyright over a picture captured by a motion sensor camera. Basically you instructed it to capture when it determined movement and the camera determined how those instructions are implemented in its output.

You could argue the person who set up the camera chose the angle or frame, just like a normal camera operator.

In the same way that the person using ChatGPT chose the prompt?

Re: Copyright Registration Guidance: Works containing material generated by AI

#94

Post by kjksf »

eloop wrote: post #26

So if movies use AI to help create characters they won't be able to claim copyright? I expect Hollywood studios will have something to say about this. With AI already being deeply integrated into DCC tools this stance isn't going to last long. And how will it be enforced if the artists don't show how they made the art?

Applying color balancing in photoshop doesn't make the original image taken by a photographer the product of a machine.

Laws are not black and white.

The whole point of lawsuits and lengthy opinions by judges is to have a nuanced interpretation of the law.

If the whole movie would be generated by a computer from a single sentence then yes, it wouldn't be copyrightable.

But as long as producing movie involves human screen writers, human directors, human performers, human camera operators etc. they are obviously creative works of those humans and therefore copyrightable.

Re: Copyright Registration Guidance: Works containing material generated by AI

#95

Post by kube-system »

lIl-IIIl wrote: post #38
kube-system wrote: post #8

This is all very sane and consistent with previous opinions on the matter. But it doesn’t answer any tough questions either, like: if an AI model outputs something very close to a training input, does the result infringe on the copyrights of the input work?

The statement addresses this: >The Office recognizes that AI-generated works implicate other copyright issues not addressed in this statement. It has launched an agency-wide initiative to delve into a wide range of these issues. Among other things, the Office intends to publish a notice of inquiry later this year seeking public input on additional legal and policy topics, including how the law should apply to the use…

I think that the answer they want to say is, “it probably does”, but they don’t want to say it and cause a big disruption to commerce until the courts intervene.

Re: Copyright Registration Guidance: Works containing material generated by AI

#96

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

Retric wrote: post #39
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on this reasoning, does that mean that you could not claim copyright over a picture captured by a motion sensor camera. Basically you instructed it to capture when it determined movement and the camera determined how those instructions are implemented in its output.

Timing is only one aspect of creativity. In most settings a video camera’s output is copyrighted because of how you select the location and angel to film. Motion capture has all of those elements, and simply doesn’t capture 99.9% of the possible images. ie: Someone picked a log crossing the river as a place where something interesting will happen and they setup the shot to look interesting. Which is the general argum…

I would argue that location and angle to film are analogous to specifying that you want a poem (as opposed to an essay) about copyright law (as opposed to quantum mechanics) in the style of William Shakespeare (as opposed to John Milton).

Basically, those are very broad parameters specified, and the machine is the one that decides to produce the output. You aren't even picking the timing or the subject or likely even the focal length. The machine is doing that based on its algorithms (and with autofocus) even the focal length.

Re: Copyright Registration Guidance: Works containing material generated by AI

#97

Post by Animats »

brotchie wrote: post #45

I’m curious. If I’ve spent 8 hours getting the perfect prompt, fine tuning a few LORAs, mixing them, choosing between 8 different checkpointed stable diffusion models, and have done a bunch of in painting, does this constitute a copyrightable work? Certainly a lot of artistic vision and effort to get to the finished “work”.

That is the "sweat of the brow" copyright argument, and it has been rejected in by US courts.

Re: Copyright Registration Guidance: Works containing material generated by AI

#98

Post by mlindner »

agentwiggles wrote: post #44
pmoriarty wrote: post #13

"Based on the Office's understanding of the generative AI technologies currently available, users do not exercise ultimate creative control over how such systems interpret prompts and generate material." As an artist and a musician I use various degrees of randomness in my work - from feedback and "noise" in a composition to abstract splatters in my paintings. Plenty of art, writing, and music is the result of partia…

I tend to agree, and I find myself doubtful that this will remain the status quo for very long. As soon as these things reach the point where they could realistically be used for something like a Disney movie, all of a sudden there will be a lot of money behind finding ways to make the output copyrightable. It seems to me that there's a spectrum here. If, for example, I create an animated music video for a song (that…

I think that's covered pretty clearly in this document? If you add creative vision on top of the generated output, then that creative vision is copyrightable.

Re: Copyright Registration Guidance: Works containing material generated by AI

#99

Post by phire »

Retric wrote: post #39
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on this reasoning, does that mean that you could not claim copyright over a picture captured by a motion sensor camera. Basically you instructed it to capture when it determined movement and the camera determined how those instructions are implemented in its output.

Timing is only one aspect of creativity. In most settings a video camera’s output is copyrighted because of how you select the location and angel to film. Motion capture has all of those elements, and simply doesn’t capture 99.9% of the possible images. ie: Someone picked a log crossing the river as a place where something interesting will happen and they setup the shot to look interesting. Which is the general argum…

There is so many places to inject creativity into the process.

Before the capture you have: Chosing the location, posing the camera, adjusting objects in the background, setting up bate to attract wildlife, choosing optimal camera settings. Even selecting a camera could be considered a creative input.

After the capture, the artist can choose which of the thousands of captures best fits their vision, crop it and applying color correction.

I don't think a single one of those actions can make it a creative work on its own. But when you combine a few of them along with intent, it becomes a creative work.

Re: Copyright Registration Guidance: Works containing material generated by AI

#100

Post by kube-system »

rhino369 wrote: post #88
kube-system wrote: post #8

This is all very sane and consistent with previous opinions on the matter. But it doesn’t answer any tough questions either, like: if an AI model outputs something very close to a training input, does the result infringe on the copyrights of the input work?

I don’t think that question is very tough. It’s almost certainly copyright infringement. The method of copying doesn’t really matter.

Well, I more mean that the answer that many suspect is the case, is tough to swallow.

In that case, the consequence would be: If you don’t validate that your AI model is producing something sufficiently different than all of the inputs, you’ve created a copyright infringement Russian roulette.

Post reply on HN