YouTube's copyright system isn't broken. The world's is.
www.youtube.com
No copyright infringement intended. | Watch Money, my new Nebula Original series, when you join CuriosityStream for only $2.99/month: https://curiositystream...

So recently there has been a lot of debate on AI-generated art and its copyright. I’ve read a lot of comments recently that made me think of this video and I want to highly encourage everyone to watch it, maybe even watch it again if you already viewed it. Watch it specifically with the question “If an AI did it, would it change anything?”

Right now, AI-generated works aren’t copyrightable. https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/ai-generator-art-text-us-copyright-policy-1234661683/ This means you can not copyright the works produced by AI.

I work in games so this is more seemingly relevant to me than maybe it is to you. https://techcrunch.com/2023/07/03/valve-responds-to-claims-it-has-banned-ai-generated-games-from-steam/ Steam has outright said, earlier this month, that it will not publish games on its platform without understanding if the training data has been of images that aren’t public domain.

So right now, common AI is producing works that are potentially copyright-infringing works and are unable to be copyrighted themselves.

So with this information, should copyright exist, and if not, how do you encourage artists and scientists to produce works if they no longer can make a living off of it?

  • @Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    0•11 months ago

    So you could go take the images out of the comic book and reuse them because they are not copyrighted.

    You’re begging the question by assuming such content hasn’t been modified and could be taken in the first place. How would you know the content you’re eyeing is usable without violating any rights or laws?

    Copyright law is one big “It depends” making sweeping statements like made and the headline of the article you linked are oversimplifying the issue and presenting a false dichotomy of a much more nuanced issue. The Reuters article I linked presents much less biased coverage that doesn’t gloss over important facts.

    • @ragusa
      1•11 months ago

      It really isn’t, because copyright law, in basically all countries AFAIK, requires a human to have made the work. So you do not hold copyright for works generated by an AI. All of the sources agree on this.

        • @ragusa
          1•11 months ago

          Sure, when they are creating the creative aspect of the work, not when the machine does. A work of a human can attain copyright, a work by machine cannot.