I’ve generally been against giving AI works copyright, but this article presented what I felt were compelling arguments for why I might be wrong. What do you think?

  • halfempty@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The article compares Photography, (which despite being “created” by nature is copyrightable), to AI art. The difference between AI art and photography is that AI art is derivative of other artists and generalized into a Model. Nature is not derivative of other photography. Derivative work has special exemptions in copyright law which prevents it from being subject to copyright.