200
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A new federal ruling states human authorship remains an "essential part of a valid copyright claim"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FlowVoid@midwest.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You need to exert creative control over the product. If you created an appropriate image for the background, that would probably be enough. If you slapped the same decal on everything produced by an AI, that would probably not be enough.

Remember, AI generated work is in the public domain. So your question is identical to "Can I take a public domain work and alter it sufficiently to claim copyright on the product?". The answer is yes, provided you make sufficient changes.

[-] ram@feddit.nl 1 points 1 year ago

Remember, AI generated work is in the public domain.

That hasn't been determined yet. A human prompt used by the AI to generate content might be enough to grant copyright. This case is about autonomous AI generated content.

[-] FlowVoid@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

A prompt is not sufficient, in fact some image copyrights were revoked from Kristina Kashtanova when it was revealed that her involvement in generating the images was limited to providing AI prompts.

She was only allowed to keep copyrights for work with more active involvement, namely text and layout.

[-] ram@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago

Here's the Copyright Office's response for anyone interested.

this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
200 points (99.5% liked)

News

23409 readers
1808 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS