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.”

  • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months 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.

    • macniel@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months 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.

      • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

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

        • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months 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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months 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.

    • seth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Exactly. People already enjoy AI-assisted art in many other forms and they don’t even realize it. When they find out, will they stop enjoying it? They don’t seem to have stopped enjoying autotuned or computer-generated music, or CGI movies, or practically every artistic photograph made in the past 30 years. It’s an arbitrary line in the sand.

    • RandomVideos@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months 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.