[TaylorAlexander]

The monkey selfie was not derived from millions of existing works, and that is the difference. If an artist has a well-known art style, and this algorithm was trained on it and can copy that style, would the artist have grounds to sue? I don't know.

[Melting_Harps]

> If an artist has a well-known art style, and this algorithm was trained on it and can copy that style, would the artist have grounds to sue? I don't know.

While nothing has been commercialized yet on the DALLE2 subreddit, I know that it can do Dave Choe's work remarkably well. I also saw Alex Gray's work to be close, but not really identical either. It wasn't as intricate as his work is.

It will be interesting if this takes off and you have a sort of Banksy effect take over where unless it's a physical piece of art it doesn't have much value and is only made all the better because of some sort polemic attached to it, eg Girl with balloon.

[lancesells]

I'm going to guess there's not going to be much value placed on anything out of DALLE for a long while. Digital art is typically worth much less than physical art and I would say these GAN images are going to worth less than digital art generated by human hand.

There will be outliers of course but I would be shocked if there's much of a market in it for at least the present.

[TaylorAlexander]

I think the value will be in work produced that gets attached to things which are being sold. So, a book cover or an album cover. If a best selling novel used artwork from this system and it happened to be a very close copy of existing work, I could imagine the author of the original work suing for royalties.

[napier]

When these tools can generate layered tiff/psd images, polygon meshes and automate UV packing; then we’ll be talking.

[lbotos]

Well, music is not "pictures" but Marvin Gaye's family got 5 million because Blurred Lines sounds similar enough to a Marvin Gaye song (even though it was not a sample): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharrell_Williams_v._Bridgepor...

[ChadNauseam]

Even if you imitate someone's style intentionally, they don't have grounds to sue. Style isn't copyrightable in the US. Whether DALL-E outputs are a derivative work is a different question, though

[l33t2328]

If I write a song am I not deriving it from the existing works I’ve been exposed to?

[TaylorAlexander]

Sure but if you just release a basic copy of a Taylor Swift song you will get sued to oblivion. So the law seems (IANAL) to care about how similar your work is to existing works. DALL-E does not seem capable of showing you the work that influenced a result, so users will have no idea if a result might be infringing. What this means to me is that with many users, some of the results would be legally infringing.

[ZetaZero]

> If an artist has a well-known art style, and this algorithm was trained on it and can copy that style...

A lawyer could argue that the algorithm is producing a derivative work of the copyrighted input.

[TaylorAlexander]

Right but if that work isn’t significantly changed from the source, it could be ruled as infringement. DALL-E cannot tell the users (afaik) if a result is close to any source material.