• darth_tiktaalik@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    per Wikipedia

    On September 21, 2022, Allen submitted an application to the us copyright office for registration of the image. Prior to the first formal refusal, the Copyright Office Examiner requested that the request would exclude any features of the image generated by Midjourney. Allen declined the request and requested copyright for the whole image.

    So what I’m getting from that is his Photoshop edits aren’t significant enough to constitute a copyrightable work on their own and the copyright office was right to deem it a non-human production.

    • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m just happy someone at the copyright office knows what they’re doing

      • FatCrab@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        This has been the copyright office’s stance for quite a while now. Actually, most of the world’s respective IP registrars and authorities do not grant IP rights to AI generated material.

  • yamanii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    I like the comment that said the AI is the artist and he’s just a commissioner, makes perfect sense.

    • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      Drag thinks profits from AI art should automatically go to funding an AI Advocacy Commission established by the government to explore questions of AI consciousness and AI rights. The AAC should be devoting resources to solving the hard problem of consciousness and improving working conditions for AIs, in whatever way experts believe is most beneficial to AI welfare.

      This is how you stop The Matrix from happening, people!

        • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          Drag is being entirely serious. Drag believes AI is a vegan issue until the hard problem of consciousness is solved in a way that conclusively proves AIs are not capable of experience. We have as much trouble telling if animals like fish are capable of feeling pain as we do with AIs. Drag does not eat fish, and drag does not believe it is right to use AI until we have an answer. Drag thinks the answer might be that using AI is fine, but drag is not a gambler and drag would certainly not gamble with another being’s life.

          • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Then “drag” (whoever that is) anthropomorphises a statistical model, which is stupid.

            • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              12
              ·
              1 month ago

              Drag does not anthropomorphise anything! Drag resents that accusation. Drag has spoken with many otherkin who are entirely inhuman and still deserving of love and respect. Drag treats AI like those. Not like a human.

              • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                it’s still antropomorphisation.

                Cool for drag. Mind if other people don’t give a crap about what drag thinks?

                • Dragon Rider (drag)@lemmy.nz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  11
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Drag thinks that if your opinion is that treating things like otherkin is anthropomorphisation, then you must be anthropomorphising otherkin.

  • potentiallynotfelix@lemmy.fish
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Art is dead, dude. It’s over. A.I. won. Humans lost.

    He made the art shown below. It’s not even good lmao, why the fuck would you declare something like that if you make the shittiest looking AI art. What a fucking clown.

    • Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 month ago

      He didn’t make shit.

      A computer made it. He provided some guidance.

      • exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Well in a way all Art is being done indirectly by some sort of instrument. Only the degree of sophistication or degree of separation of this instrument is different. A pencil drawing is in principle also done by the pencil, but I provided a lot of guidance through my hand. A pencil - almost no sophistication - is on one side of the spectrum and Midjourney/Stable Diffusion etc is on the other side of the spectrum.

        I don’t want to judge AI “art” in general - there’s so many awful traditional artworks that AI art doesn’t really stand out.

        What rubs me the wrong way is that it is a tool that no human can understand reasonably well. Everybody can understand a pencil. It’s possible to understand a computer renderer that renders digital art. But no one can understand the totality of an LLM which was trained on terabytes of images. It’s a lot of trial and error, because what the tool does generate random images even with precise directions. It’s throwing dice until one likes the result.

        The one thing I give this “artist” credit for: he was very early (maye even the first?) that entered AI art into a contest and fooled the jury. Being the first is often enough historically to make “great art”. Where art is more measured n the impact it has on a societal discussion. So I give him that.

        But a court already decided you can’t copyright AI art, because it’s trained on other art without permission. So he can get fucked.

        • Wogi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          The pencil does not make the art.

          There’s a fundamental difference between AI image generation and an artist creating something that is both inherent and obvious.

          If you can’t see that then I’m not sure there’s much help for you.

          More than that, art being created by an artist has a style and a feeling behind it. There’s a nostalgia present in every painting. An artist saw something, and recreated it in a way that spoke to them.

          An algorithm can recreate images that look similar but with no understanding. It’s just an image and lacks all the things that makes art what it is. By removing humanity from art you literally remove the reason for it to exist.

          Flatly, it isn’t art. It’s slightly better than random. But as it happens, humans are better at that too.

  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m not convinced he is not playing 4D chess and recognizes the huuuge irony.

    Then again, satire is dead.

  • Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    In 2021 I made a sound installation project called "Opéra Spatial " and entered a bunch of public prompt in mid-jouney via discord to generate images for the work. This guy made his image on year later.

  • Coskii@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    One of the very firest things I looked into when I learned about midjourney was look into the copyright matters pertaining to Ai generated art. Saw that it’s not really copyrightable, and then started using the search feature on their discord to find prompts by others for the junk I wanted.