|
|
|
|
|
|
by sam345
1226 days ago
|
|
|
This doesn't seem too complicated to me. An AI trained on images that produces a new image even if in same style as the source database is not violating copyright. It sucks for artists but that's not an argument that current law bans it. If current law banned it, every artist who was inspired in their work by other styles or image would be violating copyright. E.g, all comic book artists study and are inspired by other comic book artists. I don't doubt there will be attempts by courts and/or legislatures hostile to AI to make up new law to impose some sort of penalty/license fee on AI generated images. One approach would be make an artists style a trademark (for all I know that is already established law but I doubt it). I doubt the effort will be successful as there will be a gazillion ways around it or it will result in a relatively small number of monopolies of protected styles which would seem even a worse outcome than a flood of AI generated art. Ultimately I think artists will need to be even more careful about branding and probably will insist on prominent displays of their signatures and promoting the idea that a premium should be placed on human generated art probably through some sort of "certified human art" label. It definitely will increase the supply of art and likely decrease the number of artists that can survive financially off their work. |
|
|
Yeah, software "doesn't seem too complicated" to non-programmers too.
No offense, but if you aren't a lawyer then your opinion on legal matters has about as much veracity as a dentist explaining how software is made.
I have a certain amount of scorn for non-engineers telling me how their app idea is a weekend job and I should do it for free. I'm sure lawyers feel the same way about us when we claim there are easy answers around stable diffusion and copyright law.
The AI was trained without permission on copyrighted data. If it was as cut and dry as you claim then why do both parties think its worth going to court?
I don't know much about the law, but I know enough to recognise when its a job for the lawyers to figure out.