Copyright infringement in AI art
technollama.co.uk
Copyright infringement in AI art
1–10 of 155 posts
Re: Copyright infringement in AI art
#2Independent of whether one thinks AI generated images are really art, I feel like they are getting very good at simulating "inspiration" and other indirect ways of copying other artists and their styles. I think the last thing we need to do is start incorporating copyright and other filters into these models to filter out content.
This just empowers others to control and monopolize content, worse than today.
Re: Copyright infringement in AI art
#3I'm not copyright expert, but I would have imagined the answer is relatively straightforward: if an image would be infringing if drawn by a human, it's also infringing if drawn by a model, and similarly for non-infringing. Does the manner in which the image is generated play into whether it infringes a copyright?
Re: Copyright infringement in AI art
#4I'm not copyright expert, but I would have imagined the answer is relatively straightforward: if an image would be infringing if drawn by a human, it's also infringing if drawn by a model, and similarly for non-infringing. Does the manner in which the image is generated play into whether it infringes a copyright?
I’m also not a copyright expert, so I wonder about things like if I draw a (crappy) picture of Spider-Man and slap it on a tshirt, can I sell it without violating copyright? I’m sure there’s established law about this kind of thing.
Re: Copyright infringement in AI art
#5Independent of whether one thinks AI generated images are really art, I feel like they are getting very good at simulating "inspiration" and other indirect ways of copying other artists and their styles. I think the last thing we need to do is start incorporating copyright and other filters into these models to filter out content. This just empowers others to control and monopolize content, worse than today.
Agreed, per the article “ style and a ‘look and feel’ are not copyrightable”
Re: Copyright infringement in AI art
#6I'm not copyright expert, but I would have imagined the answer is relatively straightforward: if an image would be infringing if drawn by a human, it's also infringing if drawn by a model, and similarly for non-infringing. Does the manner in which the image is generated play into whether it infringes a copyright?
The general consensus in the IP space (in the US at least) is to treat AI no differently than any other tool.
Re: Copyright infringement in AI art
#7I'm not copyright expert, but I would have imagined the answer is relatively straightforward: if an image would be infringing if drawn by a human, it's also infringing if drawn by a model, and similarly for non-infringing. Does the manner in which the image is generated play into whether it infringes a copyright?
I’m also not a copyright expert, so I wonder about things like if I draw a (crappy) picture of Spider-Man and slap it on a tshirt, can I sell it without violating copyright? I’m sure there’s established law about this kind of thing.
My guess is that your badly drawn Spider-Man T-shirt would violate trademark, but not copyright.
Re: Copyright infringement in AI art
#8Independent of whether one thinks AI generated images are really art, I feel like they are getting very good at simulating "inspiration" and other indirect ways of copying other artists and their styles. I think the last thing we need to do is start incorporating copyright and other filters into these models to filter out content. This just empowers others to control and monopolize content, worse than today.
Agreed, per the article “ style and a ‘look and feel’ are not copyrightable”
I wonder if they can be trademarked. If not now, maybe later.
Re: Copyright infringement in AI art
#9I'm not copyright expert, but I would have imagined the answer is relatively straightforward: if an image would be infringing if drawn by a human, it's also infringing if drawn by a model, and similarly for non-infringing. Does the manner in which the image is generated play into whether it infringes a copyright?
> Does the manner in which the image is generated play into whether it infringes a copyright?
Yes, it does. Let's leave AI out for a moment.
If you lock yourself into your room with no Internet access, and you draw (or write etc) something independently that just happens to look exactly like some already existing copyright-ed work, you are still not infringing any copyrights.
If you produced the same work by making a copy, you would infringe copyright.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_room_design for how that's relevant in real life.
However you can infringe on patents and trademarks with independent work, ie even if you don't just make a copy.
Re: Copyright infringement in AI art
#10I'm not copyright expert, but I would have imagined the answer is relatively straightforward: if an image would be infringing if drawn by a human, it's also infringing if drawn by a model, and similarly for non-infringing. Does the manner in which the image is generated play into whether it infringes a copyright?
> Does the manner in which the image is generated play into whether it infringes a copyright? Yes, it does. Let's leave AI out for a moment. If you lock yourself into your room with no Internet access, and you draw (or write etc) something independently that just happens to look exactly like some already existing copyright-ed work, you are still not infringing any copyrights. If you produced the same work by making a…
AI isn't locked in a room. No end user can verify the sourced training images, so anything coming close to an existing work should be assumed to have been part of the source material for the derivative.