Comment on U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear dispute over copyrights for AI-generated material
tabular@lemmy.world 1 day agoSeems impossible to me but I’m not an artist - I write code as a hobby and see no way to definitively prove I wrote any code that an AI could also produce. Is there any aspect of art creation that an AI cannot replicate?
I don’t know how to write code myself, but intuitively it seems a little different in this case.
When it comes to photography, I can show the original unedited RAW file with full resolution and full metadata and everyone else just has a lower-resolution JPG. The same thing applies to most digital art.
ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
You don’t have drafts or anything that can show the history of development? I write as a hobby and I have tons of drafts that show the development of my stories over time. If somebody tried to claim my works were AI, I could easily dispute that.
dan@upvote.au 1 day ago
What if the drafts were created using AI too?
Code is often in a source control system of some sort, which tracks changes to the code (who changed it and when it was changed). I don’t think that could prove that a human wrote it, though.
I think in cases like this, the author could prove they created the code/story/art/whatever by having a deep understanding of the material. That’s how Michael Jackson defended against lawsuits saying he copied someone else’s song - he described his songwriting process and could hum/beatbox every instrument in the track.
ToTheGraveMyLove@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
How you gonna fake years worth of hand written notes and dated drafts?
tabular@lemmy.world 1 day ago
If the training data for “drafts” and “hand written notes” exists then one can train an AI on it, and generate it the same way. Do some artists share such things?