this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
92 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37735 readers
51 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've generally been against giving AI works copyright, but this article presented what I felt were compelling arguments for why I might be wrong. What do you think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlowVoid@midwest.social 59 points 1 year ago (22 children)

The argument relies a lot on an analogy to photographers, which misunderstands the nature of photography. A photographer does not give their camera prompts and then evaluate the output.

A better analogy would be giving your camera to a passerby and asking them to take your photo, with prompts about what you want in the background, lighting, etc. No matter how detailed your instructions, you won't have a copyright on the photo.

[–] commandar@kbin.social 38 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This AI ruling is also actually completely in-line with existing precedent from the photography world.

The US Copyright Office has previously ruled that a photograph taken by a non-human (in this case, a monkey) is not copyrightable:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_dispute

[–] abhibeckert 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

If he had deliberately caused the monkey to take that photo, he might have owned the copyright.

If you pay a photographer to take photos at your wedding, you own the copyright for those photos - not the photographer.

[–] Wiz@midwest.social 8 points 1 year ago

If you deal with the photographer that you own the images from the wedding and that's in the contract, yeah. Otherwise, traditional copyright law would apply, and the photographer gets the rights.

[–] ag_roberston_author 2 points 1 year ago

Unless it is explicity specified in a contract, no you wouldn't. Most people don't.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)