Who knew the first AI battles would be fought by artists?

Re:Who knew the first AI battles would be fought by artists? by brian_cloutier on Thursday December 15, 2022 @07:22PM (#34007786)

What distinguishes a derivative from an original work? What is it about AI-generated art which makes it so clearly derivative, in your mind?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Who knew the first AI battles would be fought by artists? by jacquesm on Thursday December 15, 2022 @07:58PM (#34008084)

That the process is automated. That is one of the important tests of originality, that something is not created in a mechanical fashion.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Who knew the first AI battles would be fought by artists? by bigiain on Thursday December 15, 2022 @08:18PM (#34008254)

> that something is not created in a mechanical fashion.

I wonder if the nerds have shot themselves in the foot here with terminology? I suspect the nerd’s lawyers would have been much happier if the entire field was named “automated mechanical creativity” instead of “artificial intelligence”. It’d be kinda amusing to see the whole field of study lose in court because of their own persistent claims that what they’re doing is not just “creating in a mechanical fashion” but creating “intelligence” which can therefore be held to account for copyright infringement. Shades of Al Capone getting busted for taxes…

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Who knew the first AI battles would be fought by artists? by jacquesm on Thursday December 15, 2022 @08:35PM (#34008413)

Good point, I had not thought of that, but terminology really matters with stuff like this and you may well be right.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Who knew the first AI battles would be fought by artists? by _0ffh on Thursday December 15, 2022 @08:19PM (#34008264)

I submit that human artists are, at the most fundamental level, no less "mechanical". They're just more complex.

Also, should a human artist creating a pastiche count as copyright infringement as well?

[ Parent | on HN ]