Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

lethal_moustache t1_jaaobu2 wrote

Reply to comment by Kromgar in AI Art Just Got Slapped With A Crucial And Devasting Legal Blow by Skullpt-Art

Possibly. However the presumption will be that AI 'assisted' art is not entitled to copyright either. I expect the presumption to be rebuttable to some extent, but the author is going to have a difficult time trying to delineate what is and is not original to the author and not something that was added by the AI. In other words, copyright will be dragged into the morass of litigation over validity that patents go through.

2

TheeHeadAche t1_jab7i89 wrote

So this case does address this in some fashion and the office ruled that significant edits can be proof of authorship. Mrs. K does provide examples of ai-generated work that is edited and they do review it.

7

gurenkagurenda t1_jabfdwy wrote

> However the presumption will be that AI 'assisted' art is not entitled to copyright either.

I would draw the exact opposite conclusion from the USCO correspondence. Note this:

> We conclude that Ms. Kashtanova is the author of the Work’s text as well as the selection, coordination, and arrangement of the Work’s written and visual elements. That authorship is protected by copyright.

They’ve specifically said that everything about but the generated images themselves is copyrighted. Assuming that this decision holds up to further scrutiny (which, who knows), an assistive tool is one that combines non-copyrightable generated content with copyrightable human generated elements. With those kinds of tools, the fact that individual elements of the final work are not copyrightable would generally be academic.

Edit: phonetic typo

5

lethal_moustache t1_jadk99k wrote

I expect that the CO will leave all issues regarding the boundaries of what is copyrighted and what is not to the litigants in much the same way that patent 'quality' issues are left to litigants. So really, not much is changing other than the strengthening of the idea that non-persons cannot be the author of copyrightable works.

Generations of law students will write on to their law reviews by rehashing this issue. Yecch.

2