Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

elementofpee t1_it7ytlj wrote

Reply to comment by Fredissimo666 in A.I.-Generated Art Is Already Transforming Creative Work by Gari_305

What implications does this have regarding copyright and trademark protection? This seem like a really grey area.

7

starstruckmon t1_it822f5 wrote

I won't go into the actual legalities since that is still untested in the US. But practically, what difference does it make? If it's good enough, how is the copyright/trademark office or judge going to know it's AI generated?

1

ImACredibleSource t1_it8oqr8 wrote

Same way musicians get sued for using a specific melody. If it's sampled and not properly attributed, this can cause huge problems. Especially for big companies with lots of money to be taken in a lawsuit

3

starstruckmon t1_it8pc3j wrote

It doesn't work like that. So no, aren't going to find "samples". If you were to use an AI tool to see if it was simmilar to some other work, problem is putting human made works through that would also result in matches.

3

ImACredibleSource t1_it8q8lq wrote

Evrything that is generated is based on work made by real artists.

0

starstruckmon t1_it8riv3 wrote

It learns from images and artwork ( like humans also do ). There aren't going to be any "samples", not any more than you'll find in the work of other humans ( which was my point ).

2

ImACredibleSource t1_it8rx6x wrote

Artists actually have to be very careful about making derivative work without attribution. There's been loads of cases about it. Even the guy who duct taped the banana to the wall is getting sued because he took the idea from someone else.

1

Surferstan101 t1_it9mk8b wrote

It is a gray area for sure Corridor Crew touched on it recently by creating art the was inspired by a certain artist and it begs the question: Are you stealing someone’s intellectual property?

Though I’m sure very few people will care.

1

starstruckmon t1_it9pb5a wrote

No, style isn't copyrightable.

1

Surferstan101 t1_it9w4vg wrote

It’s not a human taking inspiration, it’s an ai directly using another artists work so who knows maybe they’ll adjust the legislation on it.

1

Fredissimo666 t1_itc7px2 wrote

It's still to be determined but I think the user should have copyright. After all, Photoshop already has automatic tools and nobody claims that the user loses copyright for using such tools.

In a finished AI image generator software, I expect there to be interractive functions. After you generate the first image, you can ask the AI to do stuff like "make the head funnier", or "keep the characters, but change the background". Then, the creative part very much involves the user as well as the AI.

1