91

I've generally been against giving AI works copyright, but this article presented what I felt were compelling arguments for why I might be wrong. What do you think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

There’s gaussian noise involved in many of photoshop’s brushes I’m pretty sure.

Does that make photoshop not a pure function of the user’s input, and hence incapable of producing anything copyrightable?

[-] FlowVoid@midwest.social 5 points 1 year ago

You need direct control over some elements of a work to claim copyright. Not necessarily all of them.

So even if the microtexture is out of your control, you still have complete control of the framing, color, etc. That's sufficient to claim copyright.

If you lose control of every element by replacing them all with prompts and/or chance, then you lose the copyright. Which is what happened in the "monkey selfie" photo.

this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
91 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37742 readers
503 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS