Comment on US rejects AI copyright for famous state fair-winning Midjourney art

• Th4tGuyII@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  No, because there's a fundemental difference between a tool that functions directly as a consequence of what you do, and an independent thing that acts based on your instruction.

  When you take a photo, you have a direct hand in making it - when you direct an AI to make art, it is the one making the art, you just choose what it makes.

  It's as silly as asking if your paintbrush owns your art as a response to being told that you can't claim copyright over art you don't own.

  source

  • uint8_t@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    you control the seed, control the prompt — you can get the “AI” to produce the very same image if you want. so yes, you do have

    a tool that functions directly as a consequence of what you do

    source

    • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      That's like saying you can control the sun for a photo because you can predict where it will be at a given time.

      The fact that an AI can be deterministic, in that the same "seeds" will generate the same images, doesn't at all invalidate my point that it is still the one interpreting the "seeds" and doing the actual image generation.

      source

      • kmkz_ninja@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        That’s like saying you can control the sun for a photo because you can predict where it will be at a given time.

        You’re the one gatekeeping work. Don’t make a dumb argument against your own dumb argument.

        If the argument against AI is that it’s too little work, then Protography neesds to sped it’s fucking game up.

        If the argument against AI is that irrelevant companies get to profit off of others’ work, then say that. Don’t make stupid arguments.

        source

        • -> View More Comments