That makes sense. A person didn’t write it. An algorithm does not and should not have the same rights as a human being.
Until that algorithm can be a self sufficient, independent entity, that is. And we’re likely decades away from that at best.
And even that would require new laws. In most (all?) jurisdictions only humans or groups of humans, like corporations and associations, can own copyright.
I mean this is a nothing burger.
An application for a work created with the help of AI can support a copyright claim if a human “selected or arranged” it in a “sufficiently creative way that the resulting work constitutes an original work of authorship,” it said.
Are there idiots who try to sell off a raw AI image render as final pieces absolutely and I never seen the point of copyrighted work on those but the question then lies on where do you draw the line on “Ai supported” work because I imagine these kind of tools are slowly getting integrated into programs like Photoshop and some people probably aren’t even aware of it.
They pause, and go, oh well, need to put some poor lackey’s name against it then.
Good. Fuck copyright
[opens popcorn] Go on then, say more…
What about the AI models (weights) themselves?
