Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heck yeah. https://fmhy.net
That's hell of a link sir.
If you want something specific fast I know a thing or too but it is all in the link.
Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
141–150 of 225 posts
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was a terrible ruling. It should be about who got the camera there and set it up, not who pushed the button. With automated recording (dashcams) there isn't even "a button." Hopefully no judge uses that as precedence.
Dashcams and security footage definitely don’t have copyright protection. Are you seriously thinking that the construction worker who set up the camera would then have copyright over everything it records?
Really? Regardless of the debate on what should and shouldn't be copyrighted, in the current system there is no way to set up a continuous camera with intention to create something and not be afforded the same rights as if I took a snapshot?
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
You wrote your house's security code on a Post-It note. Somebody came in as a houseparty guest and located the note, and discretely copied it onto their hand to get access to the house during your next vacation. Which verb would describe their knowledge of this security code?
Obtained, read, viewed, learned, discovered. The knowledge wasn't obtained illegally or illicitly, immorally perhaps. Illegal entry/trespass is a crime regardless of the method used however. In your analogy copying the code (online content) isn't necessarily illegal, however using that knowledge without compensation, permission or attribution may be a crime (depending on copyright law, judges rulings etc).
https://blog.curiousquail.com/im-upset-again-about-a-co-crea...
What about using torrents to acquire that content?
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#144Microsoft is using AI generated code in their OS, so does that mean they lose copyright protection in Europe?
Once it becomes too substantial and there is not enough human oversight in process.
Say I would prompt Unix like system in few prompts or started agent chain to make it. That OS wouldn't have a protection.
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#145Under this interpretation models themselves do not have copyright protection either
Funnily I think copyright protection for LLM model is 15 years. As to me it just looks like very fancy database and that is the protection for those...
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#146This then implies that in the EU, AI-generated content cannot have a license applied? MIT, GPL, CC, etc?
Yes. Also CC is complicated in EU. A creator can not "give up" their copy right. Work can not put to "Public Domain" as creator.
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#147I will add a pixel by "hand" with software on my computer.
Judges are not at all stupid enough to fall for that. You would get laughed out of court for that. Judges are not computers, and they can not be tricked with these kinds of technicalities. In fact, the defense of "I wrote the prompts that led to the code that the LLM wrote" would be a much better defense.
My bet would be to build anything from multiple independently generated pieces of AI code. Thus the software build from AI generated blocks by human would at least have protection on basis of the structure and work put into that.
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#148Create an “assign copyright” skill? I mean the copyright has to belong to somebody right?
There does not have to be copyright. Nothing mandates that piece of data has one.
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obtained, read, viewed, learned, discovered. The knowledge wasn't obtained illegally or illicitly, immorally perhaps. Illegal entry/trespass is a crime regardless of the method used however. In your analogy copying the code (online content) isn't necessarily illegal, however using that knowledge without compensation, permission or attribution may be a crime (depending on copyright law, judges rulings etc).
https://blog.curiousquail.com/im-upset-again-about-a-co-crea... What about using torrents to acquire that content?
Torrents are legal?
Seeding is often considered the actual point of infringement, aka sharing copyrighted material without the right licence.
I should note I suppose that I don't agree with companies using artists or developers hard work for their own financial gain without compensation, whatever form that may take.
The problem as usual is the availability of legal loopholes when you have a team of lawyers and near infinite money.
Re: Copyright does not protect AI-generated content in EU
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there is an easy test: if you didn’t write it, it’s not yours. If we go back 10 years and your friend says “I have an idea for an app, here it is,” and you build it, you own the copyright because you wrote it. You give an idea to the pile of math calculated of the stolen work of humanity, the math owns it (which it can’t, so no one owns it). No matter how detailed of a conversation you have with a friend, I d…
That's how you want it to be, but that's not how it is.
Actually, in Germany, copyright remains with the author and their heirs until seventy years after the author's death; it cannot be sold or given away, even if someone paid them doing it. Instead, there is "Verwertungsrecht" or "Nutzungsrecht" ("License", "Usage right"). In the USA, copyright can be sold completely to another legal entity.