Hacker News Reader

Comment by kevingadd | Hacker News Reader

I think the obstacles there are distribution and IP rights. I think we will see content like that find widespread appeal and success but actually turning it into $100m in revenue requires having the copyright (at present, not possible for AI-generated content) and being able to convince a distributor to invest in it. Those both seem like really tough things to solve.

View on HN

Purely AI-generated content -- with no human authorship -- is not eligible for US copyright protection. However if a human contributes meaningfully to the final output (editing, selection, arrangement, etc.) it becomes eligible. See Thaler v. Perlmutter (2023).

>is not eligible for US copyright protection

Once industry adopts AI generation, which it will, a new law will be quickly signed.

In a way, not allowing copyright of AI material really only serves a tiny group of people. "We want to empower everyone to bring their ideas to market, not just those with the ability to draw them" is not a particularly evil or amoral sentiment.

As if the ability is not attainable, people want to be put on top of the mountain without any effort.

When society climbs mountains, they eventually build elevators. Its a core functionality and the reason why we are so advanced. Just take a moment to realize how many peaks you already sit on top of, without even thinking about. Your home is overflowing with cheap wares from mountains ascended ages ago that you now have "no effort" access to.

Yeah, people underestimate how hard it is to get a movie into a theatre AND get people to pay for a ticket.

Hollywood can barely get any well made movies past $100 million these days unless it's based on some well known franchise (minecraft, Captain America, Snow White) or it has some well known actor.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com