• @ImADifferentBird@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    106 hours ago

    So what you’re saying is that the AI is the artist, not the prompter. The AI is performing the labor of creating the work, at the request of the prompter, like the hypothetical art student you mentioned did, and the prompter is not the creator any more than I would be if I kindly asked an art student to paint me a picture.

    In which case, the AI is the thing that gets the authorial credit, not the prompter. And since AI is not a person, anything it authors cannot be subjected to copyright, just like when that monkey took a selfie.

    • @GenderNeutralBro
      link
      English
      35 hours ago

      It should be as copyrightable as the prompt. If the prompt is something super generic, then there’s no real work done by the human. If the prompt is as long and unique as other copyrightable writing (which includes short works like poems) then why shouldn’t it be copyrightable?

      • @kungen@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 hours ago

        If the prompt is as long and unique as other copyrightable writing (which includes short works like poems) then why shouldn’t it be copyrightable?

        Okay, so the prompt can be that. But we’re talking about the output, no? My hello-world source code is copyrighted, but the output “hello world” on your machine isn’t really, no?

      • @ImADifferentBird@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Because it wasn’t created by a human being.

        If I ask an artist to create a work, the artist owns authorship of that work, no matter how long I spent discussing the particulars of the work with them. Hours? Days? Months? Doesn’t matter. They may choose to share or reassign some or all of the rights that go with that, but initial authorship resides with them. Why should that change if that discussion is happening not with an artist, but with an AI?

        The only change is that, not being a human being, an AI cannot hold copyright. Which means a work created by an AI is not copyrightable. The prompter owns the prompt, not the final result.

        • @GenderNeutralBro
          link
          English
          13 hours ago

          You’re assigning agency to the program, which seems wrong to me. I think of AI like an advanced Photoshop filter, not like a rudimentary person. It’s an artistic tool that artists can use to create art. It does not in and of itself create art any more than Photoshop creates graphics or a synthesizer creates music.

          • @ImADifferentBird@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            4
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            Ah, but there is a fundamental difference there. A photographer takes a picture, they do not tell the camera to take a picture for them.

            It is the difference between speech and action.