Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ahfoo t1_jcs82us wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in AI-generated art may be protected, says US Copyright Office by redbellx86

This is not a simple case though. If I take a picture of someone's face in public and then apply a filter to it, that doesn't immediately give me copyright ownership over someone else's image who does not consent to it being used. Simply altering it does not make it mine.

If this were the case, I could simply add a second of silence to the end of any audio recording and then sell it as my own work.

2

SwallowYourDreams t1_jct0roj wrote

You're confounding copyright (which is supposed to protect the 'artist' in this case) with the right to one's own image (which protects everyone from being depicted against their will, including artists). Those two are separate, different things.

1

ahfoo t1_jcu48lv wrote

They're both examples of how simply changing an image doesn't create a new right. The two examples are in separate paragraphs. That's not confounding them, that's two separate examples.

1