[deleted]
Famous AI Artist Says He's Losing Millions from People Stealing His Work
11–20 of 100 posts
Re: Famous AI Artist Says He's Losing Millions from People Stealing His Work
#12> “The refusal of the U.S. Copyright Office to recognize human authorship in AI-assisted creations highlights a critical issue in modern intellectual property law. As AI continues to evolve, it is imperative that our legal frameworks adapt to protect the rights of those who harness these technologies for creative expression,” Allen’s lawyer, Pester, recently said.
Got it. So while substantial efforts have been made to claim that real artists—people who spent years of their lives working to produce actual works of art—have no legitimate claim to legal protection from AI companies, the people that should get legal protection are the people using Midjourney.
Re: Famous AI Artist Says He's Losing Millions from People Stealing His Work
#13Real AI artists are spending hundreds of hours and their human labor is absolutely copyrightable. There are three types of labor-intensive AI art: (1) ComfyUI node graph editing, (2) canvas-based compositions that use AI as a filter or brush, and (3) large multi-day compositions typically built for film and gaming. Sometimes all of these manual and laborious methodologies are employed for one work. We're so past the…
If that's the case then they are sampling previous artists and need to pay them. You can't have your cake and eat it.
[deleted]
Re: Famous AI Artist Says He's Losing Millions from People Stealing His Work
#14This may not be the reason he's "losing" money here, but I was struck by how much less... impressive that piece is to me now compared to when I first saw it. (Visually impressive; I've always known it was from Midjourney.)
When the news first broke about it winning an award, I was like "well damn, I can see why—it's visually striking!" But the longer I look at it, and the more LLM-generated images I see in general, the less this one stands out to me. It's still pleasing, but seems less unique in both its strengths and flaws: the soft glowing lights, the tasteful muted palette, the random greebled details.
And it bothers me that the glowing orb/archway in the center has a distinct border around most of its circumference, but the part from 4 to 6 o'clock is fuzzier and blends into the nearby wall(?) :P
Re: Famous AI Artist Says He's Losing Millions from People Stealing His Work
#15Millions? His work? Come on now.
Re: Famous AI Artist Says He's Losing Millions from People Stealing His Work
#16Y'all really want to be mad at this but this is one of those tragic cases where the worst person is correct.
* AI companies claim that training should not be covered by copyright. This says nothing at all about the model outputs which can still violate copyright.
* Curation makes something a copyrightable work. This applies to photographers and machine generated art.
The copyright office's ruling doesn't change that second point although in practice it might raise the bar.
Re: Famous AI Artist Says He's Losing Millions from People Stealing His Work
#17Me sitting here wishing I had millions to lose in the first place...
Re: Famous AI Artist Says He's Losing Millions from People Stealing His Work
#18what a jackass
Re: Famous AI Artist Says He's Losing Millions from People Stealing His Work
#19AI art is dead, dude. Get over it. Grifters lost. Regulators won.
Re: Famous AI Artist Says He's Losing Millions from People Stealing His Work
#20The U.S. Copyright Office has made a bogus claim -- 'work derived from AI platforms “contained no human authorship”' -- my belief is that this incorrect and probably illegal edict is simply a poor excuse for the office to neglect its mandate. They do not have the resources and technological footing to register the flood of AI art they would likely receive for copyright protection. Regardless of chutzpah I support Allen's move against it. Style has not been copyrightable, living human artists learn and are influenced from their exposure to the broad history of art, it is not somehow different for AI models to do so as well. Infringement lies in the output of AI models, not on its inputs. Artists using generative art making techniques have been provided copyright protections for generations. While inconvenient for the office, AI mediated works also warrant protection.