A federal judge on Friday upheld a finding from the U.S. Copyright Office that a piece of art created by AI is not open to protection.

“In March, the copyright office affirmed that most works generated by AI aren’t copyrightable but clarified that AI-assisted materials qualify for protection in certain instances. An application for a work created with the help of AI can support a copyright claim if a human “selected or arranged” it in a “sufficiently creative way that the resulting work constitutes an original work of authorship,” it said.”

Thaler was appealing this, and his appeal was denied.

  • gullible
    link
    fedilink
    010 months ago

    What is there to prove that a piece of artwork was or wasn’t made by AI? Within a few years, it will be nigh impossible to tell when AI helped or wholly created a piece, and this will effectively stop no one. It’s a bandaid on a hemorrhage. It’s a very helpful bandaid, but by fuck can someone grab the sutures already?

    • RagnellOP
      link
      fedilink
      010 months ago

      Well, computer forensics IS a thing. Computers keep a record of everything done on them, and if it comes down to a lot of money at stake and a lawsuit then those computers can be looked at.

      • gullible
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        What, a full department equivalent to the IRS to constantly audit art and its process? That could work. It’d be pricy, but it could work.