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.”

  • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    AI can be an excellent shortcut or a great tool, and help us make our work easier and products better, but it is not a creator of original creative works

    An AI image doesn’t just pop into the universe apropos of nothing. I don’t think you can say there is zero creativity in the process. A human sat down, conceived of an idea, and used a tool to create it. What is at the core of debate is whether the result is a creative work made by the human or not.

    I agree that the AI is not the creator of the work. But I’m not so quick to say that the person wasn’t either… Cameras have a lot of stuff they do for the human. You can’t credibly say that you create any photo you take with your phone. The billions of transistors and image processing algorithms do that. You chose what to point it at and when. And maybe some technical parameters. And when you prompt an AI you have full creative control over what goes into it as well. Hell - you could probably even copyright the prompt if it’s sufficiently creative! But not the resulting artwork?

    We may not value AI art as much as we do traditional arts. But I’m very hesitant to say that it is not art at all.

    • erin (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Photography has far more depth, complexity, and creativity as an artform and comparing it to AI both misunderstands the process and does it a huge disservice. Even before lining up the shot, the photographer must choose the right focus length, exposure, and a number of other technical settings, then must choose a subject, perhaps modify the composition, and have the right timing.

      Photography can be as simple as pointing a phone camera for a well timed moment or snapping a once in a lifetime shot with an expensive lens. AI art takes orders of magnitude less creativity or training to do well, because it’s stealing the work of people that have already learned the composition techniques and have done the legwork, which is just being shoddily regurgitated by the plagiarism machine.

      • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Photography has far more depth, complexity, and creativity as an artform…

        Photography can be as simple as pointing a phone camera

        I love it when my interlocutor immediately refutes their own argument.