426

An artist who infamously duped an art contest with an AI image is suing the U.S. Copyright Office over its refusal to register the image’s copyright. 

In the lawsuit, Jason M. Allen asks a Colorado federal court to reverse the Copyright Office’s decision on his artwork Theatre D’opera Spatialbecause it was an expression of his creativity.

Reuters says the Copyright Office refused to comment on the case while Allen in a statement complains that the office’s decision “put me in a terrible position, with no recourse against others who are blatantly and repeatedly stealing my work.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

Most AI art haters only hate it after they've learned it's made by AI. In reality it's next to impossible to tell a well made AI art from human made digital art for example. Ofcourse everyone claims they can immediately tell the difference but even they know they're kidding themselves. It's gatekeeping, pure and simple.

There's plenty of really good AI art and generating it is not as simple as they often make it to be.

[-] RandomVideos@programming.dev 5 points 1 month ago

The problem isnt that the art is bad. It feeling like its made by AI doesnt ruin the art

The problem is that it is made by AI, that the art has a negligible amount of effort put into it

[-] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

As a photographer I feel like the same thing could be said of it. Especially when talking about film or polaroid cameras, it doesn't take much longer than a few seconds to take the picture. I can't even write a prompt for gen-AI in that time.

[-] DmMacniel@feddit.org 3 points 1 month ago

Gatekeeping? Nah, it's not as it's quite easy for AI Bros to pick up a pencil. Nobody, except disabilities, stops them.

And yeah AI slop has become so well that rabid people are accusing actual artists that their art was made by AI. But why is that? Certainly not because their previous art was trained on...

Fuck AI. It is used to replace actual humans and human creativity.

[-] Carighan@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Hate the artist, not the art. Hence, hate the AI, not the AI-generated art.

[-] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

AI is not an artist any more than a paint brush is. Neither can generate anything on their own. They're tools.

[-] Carighan@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Oh I'd be careful, that undermines the "the AI is an artist in itself" - defense of companies against plagiarism charges. Because otherwise if we go with that, most material would not be allowed as sources for training. The vast majority in fact.

Better let the AI be an artist, that way it's legal if it steals from others works, but that also means I can critique it as, well, being shit and just doing derivative works. 😛

[-] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

AI doesn't copy pre-existing art. It's influenced by it. Human artists take influence from prior artwork just as well as AI does. Nobody is creating art in a vacuum.

this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2024
426 points (100.0% liked)

News

23387 readers
1994 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS