- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
There is a discussion on Hacker News, but feel free to comment here as well.
You must log in or register to comment.
Honestly that makes sense to me. Copyright protection only extending to human works might be the only way to keep creatives fed in a new AI dominated paradigm.
Exactly. These kids with their computors don’t know how to create art anymore. In my days, all we needed was a hand, some red ink, and a nice dry spot in a cave.
On the serious note, screw the copyright.
This doesn’t sound like it’ll scale. What if I use an AI drawing tool to remove parts of an image or auto-shrink or expand? Can I not copyright my work? If I take a few AI images and put them together into a piece does that become copyrightable? How much editing do I have to do of an AI image before it can be copyrighted?
Moreover, how does one even prove their work is or isn’t made using AI? Are we going to need to provide video proof of our work now?
There was already one instance of an artist being banned from posting their work on /r/Art, because their art style resembled AI. Lots of the distinct swirls and swooshes that AI tends to have. They proved that the pieces weren’t made with AI, (and many of their pieces existed before the AI art boom) but the mods upheld the ban stating that since it resembled AI art it still violated their “No AI Art” rule.
Welcome to the age of disbelief I guess… Jeeze…
