Can AI be an author? Federal Court asked to decide in new copyright case

ctvnews.ca

8 points·avivallssa··3 comments

If an ape can't have copyright, why should AI?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disp...

There was a discussion earlier on HN whether it is OK to steal content if its open on Web.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40833323

However, the extension to that is the Copyrights now. According to me, as long as the Idea creator is a Human, it should not matter if its AI and any LLM creating the art.

The human who gives the prompt may be the Author. This can be concerning but challenging for Legal.

I completely agree with this. AI is merely a tool. An advanced auto-correct, a smart fill-in-the-blanks tool. It doesn't do anything on its own. A human has to be involved in the use of it. Imo that human should be the one that reaps the rewards.

Maybe one day when AI can be legitimate actors themselves this might change, but for now AI doesn't do anything by itself. There's always a human involved to some extent.

Although I do think that one aspect that should be considered is the amount of human input to determine whether copyright should exist on the work at all. If I just generate an image with the prompt of "beautiful girl" with all default settings, then I think there would be a lot of other people that will generate the same (or substantially similar) image.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com