The US Copyright Office offers creative workers a powerful labor protective.

  • PancakeLegend@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you’ve spent some time with AI already you’ve probably realised that it takes some level of domain-specific information to get AI to produce a useful output. For example, people who are already artistic are better at getting artistically interesting images out of an AI. The idea and the guidance have value and are essential to the outcome. Prompt engineering is a very real skill.

    Now this case is about an autonomous tool, which by definition doesn’t include a human’s guidance. I agree that the waters here are definitely murkier. If however, you put a blanket over all AI-assisted works and say that the author/engineer doesn’t deserve credit, or protection, then I think you’re off the mark.

    • 3laws@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Credit? Sure, whatevs! Copyright, royalties or ownership? Absolutely not.

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Hard disagree, there is a near certainty that any work produced from a current generative “ai” model includes material scraped from the web in violation of the release license.

      Whatever skill they apply, it’s still by default an unlicensed derivative work.