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

US appeals court rules AI generated art cannot be copyrighted

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 562 posts

Re: US appeals court rules AI generated art cannot be copyrighted

#21

Post by wildzzz »

This is pretty much the exact same case as the monkey that took a photo. The photo is now in the public domain as the monkey cannot be an author of the photo and since the photographer didn't take the photo, neither is he the author. The US Copyright Office clarified that "only works created by a human can be copyrighted under United States law, which excludes photographs and artwork created by animals or by machines without human intervention". If you placed some food on a camera trigger and the animal reached for it, taking a photo in the process, that would likely be human intervention. I feel as if this applies to AI as well. A computer cannot be the author but as long as it was a human that told the computer to make the image or wrote the code that allowed the computer to generate the image on its own, then the human is the author.

Trying to assign copyright to an AI is techno-futurist bullshit by trying to give legal presence to a piece of software. What's next? Shutting down an AI is murder? Give it a rest.

Re: US appeals court rules AI generated art cannot be copyrighted

#22

Post by vharuck »

phyzix5761 wrote: post #3
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #2

> Because many of the Copyright Act's provisions make sense only if an author is a human being, the best reading of the Copyright Act is that human authorship is required for registration This is going to be a very selective judgment.

As all interpretations of law are. That's why there's the profession of lawyer and they make very good money if they can convince a judge and jury of their interpretation of the law. As a software engineer I see the dangers of such an inexact system. Where we can put people in jail for the rest of their lives or let others go free just because there's so much gray area in the interpretation of the law.

Exact systems that put people in jail would be much more terrifying, because they'd achieve simplicity by ignoring complexity. The existence of the state and federal supreme courts in the US shows the need for careful consideration of how laws interact with one another and an ever-changing world.

Re: US appeals court rules AI generated art cannot be copyrighted

#24

Post by numpad0 »

Why are topics of image generator AI always so chock full of '0x3F', confusion, rage, and hatred, often attributed to hand-wavy strawman "luddites"?

As if, I mean I'm suspecting that, exposure to generative image output is triggering model collapse even for us humans?

Re: US appeals court rules AI generated art cannot be copyrighted

#25

Post by andix »

deepsun wrote: post #20
kristopolous wrote: post #8

"affirmed that a work of art generated by artificial intelligence without human input cannot be copyrighted under U.S. law" Does that exist? What would that even be? A "random2image" model?

I wonder if I supply a random input to a fine-tuned model that can only generate what I wanted initially. I.e. the model named "starry-night-van-gough-with-bunny" can generate only one image.

If you want to know if this would be copyrightable, just flip a coin. I don't think anyone can give you better legal advice on this example than a coin toss.

Re: US appeals court rules AI generated art cannot be copyrighted

#26

Post by wildzzz »

tehjoker wrote: post #6

interesting, i bet AI assisted art is copyrightable though (i.e. have AI do the "boring" parts and have the human do the interesting parts) here's one way I think that could be helpful. I read an interview with the final fantasy 6 director where he said doing a final fantasy 6 remake would probably take 20 years because the amount of content (and various art decisions) would take so much longer to make under today's…

I'm guessing it's something like 80% of the tasks only take 20% of the time. I'm sure AI generated textures could speed some of the development work up but I'm sure the majority of the work would still involve the small adjustments and tuning of the models. AI gets the gist right but the devil is in the details so designers may end up spending more time fixing what's wrong versus just doing it the traditional way.

Re: US appeals court rules AI generated art cannot be copyrighted

#27

Post by Klomikij »

wildzzz wrote: post #21

This is pretty much the exact same case as the monkey that took a photo. The photo is now in the public domain as the monkey cannot be an author of the photo and since the photographer didn't take the photo, neither is he the author. The US Copyright Office clarified that "only works created by a human can be copyrighted under United States law, which excludes photographs and artwork created by animals or by machines…

[dead]

Re: US appeals court rules AI generated art cannot be copyrighted

#29

Post by ourmandave »

wildzzz wrote: post #21

This is pretty much the exact same case as the monkey that took a photo. The photo is now in the public domain as the monkey cannot be an author of the photo and since the photographer didn't take the photo, neither is he the author. The US Copyright Office clarified that "only works created by a human can be copyrighted under United States law, which excludes photographs and artwork created by animals or by machines…

Can they still try the Corporations Are People angle?

Re: US appeals court rules AI generated art cannot be copyrighted

#30

Post by nadermx »

wildzzz wrote: post #21

This is pretty much the exact same case as the monkey that took a photo. The photo is now in the public domain as the monkey cannot be an author of the photo and since the photographer didn't take the photo, neither is he the author. The US Copyright Office clarified that "only works created by a human can be copyrighted under United States law, which excludes photographs and artwork created by animals or by machines…

That was one hell of a photogenic monkey

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disp...

Post reply on HN