|
|
|
|
|
by SR2Z
21 days ago
|
|
I don't know where you get this idea. A human being who used AI to generate something may actually claim copyright over the product. You might be getting confused with a court case that ruled that AI could not have sole copyright, but that case just says that only a human being can hold copyright. |
|
I got the idea by reading the law,
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10922
For example, the copyright is valid for X years after the author's death. The copyright transfers to the author's "widow or widower" or "surviving children or grandchildren". Does AI die? Who is the AI's widow? Who is the AI's children and grandchildren?
Oh, yeah, you're just wrong. The law explicity states that copyright belongs to HUMAN authors. Not AI. And courts have repeatedly ruled AI generated work cannot be copyrighted. You're the one who seems a little confused.