Künstler legt gegen Verweigerung des Urheberrechts für preisgekrönte KI-generierte Arbeit Berufung ein

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/10/artist-appeals-copyright-denial-for-prize-winning-ai-generated-work/

3 Comments

  1. a_Ninja_b0y on

    From the article :-

    ”Jason Allen—a synthetic media artist whose Midjourney-generated work “Théâtre D’opéra Spatial” went viral and incited backlash after winning a state fair art competition—is not giving up his fight with the US Copyright Office.

    Last fall, the Copyright Office refused to register Allen’s work, claiming that almost the entire work was AI-generated and insisting that copyright registration requires more human authorship than simply plugging a prompt into Midjourney.

    Allen is now appealing that decision, asking for judicial review and alleging that “the negative media attention surrounding the Work may have influenced the Copyright Office Examiner’s perception and judgment.” He claims that the Examiner was biased and considered “improper factors” such as the public backlash when concluding that he had “no control over how the artificial intelligence tool analyzed, interpreted, or responded to these prompts.”

    As Allen sees it, a rule establishing a review process requiring an Examiner to determine which parts of the work are human-authored seems “entirely arbitrary” since some Copyright Examiners “may not even be able to distinguish an artwork that used AI tools to assist in the creation from one which does not use any computerized tools.”

    Further, Allen claims that the denial of copyright for his work has inspired confusion about who owns rights to not just Midjourney-generated art but all AI art, and as AI technology rapidly improves, it will only become harder for the Copyright Office to make those authorship judgment calls.

    That becomes an even bigger problem if the Copyright Office gets it wrong too often, Allen warned, running the risk of turning every artist registering works into a “suspect” and potentially bogging courts down with copyright disputes.

    Ultimately, Allen is hoping that a jury reviewing his appeal will reverse the denial, arguing that there is more human authorship in his AI-generated work than the Copyright Office considered when twice rejecting his registration.”

  2. IntrinsicGiraffe on

    I always felt we should be approaching art with a more openness nature to it because art should be more focus on expression rather than monetization. So I guess I essentially feel that all arts should, by default, be under non-commercial use. That’s not to say that I believe artists shouldn’t be paid though. I believe in universal income that promotes expressing one self through art. It’d greatly help with depression by giving an outlet for them to vent and potentially get in touch with others who’ve gone through or feel similarly.

    I imagine a utopia where people can explore or dedicate themself to a hobby on the side while working a societal job where as more popular artists among their niche will be able to sustain themselves entirely on said hobby through fan supports (whether it’d be donations or merchandise).

  3. EltaninAntenna on

    On the one hand, I don’t have the knee-jerk reaction against AI in general that other people do; ChatGPT has pretty much replaced Google for me. On the other, fuck AI “artists” and prompt jockeys. It’s like trying to copyright ideas.

Leave A Reply