Comment on Templates of Cleo (my OC) holding a flag. (view body for more)
hperrin@lemmy.ca 5 weeks agoThe precedent so far is that you can only copyright the things you actually had a majority influence in creating. So if the AI did most of the work, you can’t copyright it. You can copyright the parts of it that were your sole creation, like pasting your logo on top of AI images, but the image itself is not copyrightable.
Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 weeks ago
You’re spreading misinformation. There hasn’t been any ruling or precedent. The copyright office issued guidance, which reflects only the office’s interpretation based on its experience. It isn’t binding in the courts and guidance from the office is not a substitute for legal advice, nor it does not create any rights or obligations for anyone. They are the lowest rung on the ladder for deciding what law means.
More importantly, the copyright office has been hosting public listening sessions asking for public comments for some time now in an effort to evolve their understanding of the subject.
Here is a link to the actual guidance and an open letter by artists if you care to read it.
hperrin@lemmy.ca 5 weeks ago
There has been a ruling issued by a judge:
www.nytimes.com/2023/…/copyright-ai-artwork.html
Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 weeks ago
Read that again.
He tried to get copyright for a computer as the author. Copyright is something only humans can hold. This is something entirely different.
hperrin@lemmy.ca 5 weeks ago
Read the actual decision:
Image
The decision was that the work was not copyrightable because it was made without human involvement.