Hopefully the clown ass supreme court doesn't come in with a ruling that overrides this and also grants all AI generated waifus access to our social security database but only during every second blood moon or sum shit
My hypothesis is that parts of the multiverse can leak into our universe and influence it. Sadly, I have no idea how one can test this, but it it would explain this
this was already settled in the monkey selfie case. At present, our laws only apply to humans. One can use AI to generate something, then have a human edit it, and that's copyrightable, but anything made with AI without human input is not allowed to be copyrighted.
but don't let there be a plot twist that will make the artists shocked and disappointed. because we don't know that the capitalists in suits have a plan that is even more cunning for the sake of market competition
Rulings like this are the best way to stop movie production companies from using AI. If they can't keep all the money from the movies they put out, then they won't use AI.
So it was not obvious this whole time? Seems like people played with “hating ai” and now finally going to move onto something that actually makes influence
I'm fine with this result. Sure it's fun to play around with but, yeah, artists that put the work in and doing it for real deserve to be able to copyright their work.
Plus I love that it means those stupid "trading cards" a certain orange blob tried to sell are even more worthless.
Once an artist creates something they automatically get copyright of their work. It is not something they need to deserve or apply for. Sadly, in today's society it isn't respected in the same way it used to be.
SO that will also apply to AI Music, Ai Movies and TV shows that are made by AI then too. So that means it would be Free to copy and download it as many times as you want and not get in trouble I am guessing then.
Yep which means there is no financial incentive to create things using AI. You will have no way to stop people from legal pirating it which means you make no money. Also not only can you download, you can upload as much as you want to whoever wants it.
You could still sell it in theory, nothing technically stops that. As for pirating, we can already do that to any artist who puts their work online. It does level the playing field though. AI art and human art both being zero-sum with no financial incentive to create.
If I generate a picture of a skeleton, that skeleton picture is not eligible for copyright protection. Now I draw a hat and cigarette on the skeleton. That image is still protected by copyright, even though it incorporates an AI image. You can take the skeleton, but not my hat and smokes.
As much of one you can hope for. This is actually how it should be.
Until we just say, "the training of models on unauthorized content is banned, under penalty of xyz," this is the best anyone can hope for. To do otherwise would be against how public domain works.
This is the same way public domain works *now.* What precedent are we setting for derivative works on public domain if we say "anything that is derived from AI works cannot be copywritten?" Should any Peter Pan adaptation be public domain? Sherlock Holmes? The Odyssey?
Yup, especially when they see people being happy about something and they feel the need to interject negativity that isn't needed/gonna solve anything in the moment 👍
Oh I'm sure you've made up a ton of reasons to be that guy but unless you're actively working against AI every day (you're not), you're just being a negative Ned to get attention, fucker
It says "solely" by AI. So when stock sites use stock photos and AI to mash two pictures, I don't think it counts—it's just if it was generated from a prompt.
Unlikely in the case of a unanimous decision like this which is now the second case in a row they lost.
Realistically, this case is dead in the water, but it mostly just covers things created directly by AI and not work made with AI assistance which will likely be the next legal battle.
The ruling mentions that, "Works must have a SUBSTANTIAL human element involved in the creation to qualify for copyright" which is BIG! But does still leave the door open for stuff that is like, 50-50 human and bot which will likely be more of an uphill battle.
Good. Fuck them. Doesn't stop the fact I have to see the garbage everywhere and do what I can to remove it, but anyone taking the shitty shortcut route deserves to not have any ownership.
Comments
In 2025?
What universe have I stepped into and can I stay?
Keep trying.
You know Mya, that this will not Mya be tollerated.
Mya.
GOOD RIDDANCE
LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Plus I love that it means those stupid "trading cards" a certain orange blob tried to sell are even more worthless.
There’s no actual change from the guidance put out by the copyright office some months ago.
Take that AI artist!
I hope the UK does this not sure where they are with it tbh.
A victory, but how much of one?
Until we just say, "the training of models on unauthorized content is banned, under penalty of xyz," this is the best anyone can hope for. To do otherwise would be against how public domain works.
You would reach more people, when you add a good description into the Alt-text field.
That is pretty easy, especially, when your image just contain text.
This way, you support visually impaired people and everyone else, who rely on a good filled Alt-text.
#accessibility
But yes, it's sadly a very limited width. It doesn't even say how much one needs to change the picture for it to not be applicable
That is all.
ACTUAL ARTIST STAY WINNING!!!
Realistically, this case is dead in the water, but it mostly just covers things created directly by AI and not work made with AI assistance which will likely be the next legal battle.
cry harder losers 😎
The process is the point.