I’ve heard arguments for both sides and i think it’s more complicated then simply yes or no. what do you guys think?

  • Stefen Auris@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    If you were to copyright AI art who would the credit go to? The original artists the training was based on? The person who created the training model? The person who writes the prompt? The computer itself? I don’t think copyright makes sense in this context

    • Tony Bark@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      Judges have ruled that they can’t be copyrighted because of this lack of a true author, and I agree.

      • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Fairly sure that was a case where the guy wanted to give the copyright to the ai algorithm itself and not about the copyrightability of the art. Specifically, he wanted them to be copyrighted as “as a work-for-hire to the owner of the Creativity Machine” - creativity machine is the name of the algorithm. Basically just a modern version of the monkey selfie kerfuffle.