|
|
|
|
|
by legutierr
1420 days ago
|
|
Consider, however, that the output of these systems may not be copyrightable. So, when you move human involvement up to a higher layer of abstraction, it’s possible that the economics of the whole effort will be fundamentally transformed. Meaning, if these systems displace human artists, copyright itself may cease to be a motivator of economic activity—removing a significant incentive for the production of new art. Also, keep in mind that: (1) there are likely to be many fewer human custodians of systems like this who sustain themselves economically than there are artists who currently sustain themselves by producing new art; and (2) these systems are only as good as the artistic inputs that are fed to them, and is very unlikely that the contributing artists gave their consent or were compensated for their involvement in any way. |
|
And regarding point 2: do you think human artists are as good as they are without already having seen lots of great artworks produced by others? Human artists don't create art from an empty vacuum of nothingness either.