Re:Stable Diffusion copyright lawsuits could be a legal eart...
by shagie on Monday April 03, 2023 @11:31AM
(#35425470)
Darth Vader falls under copyright for fictional characters ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_protection_for_ficti... - I learned about this as part of the Eleanor set of lawsuits which entangled a YouTube car vlogger B is for Build - the most recent bit on the lawsuits - (not B is for Build lawsuit in particular as that was settled) https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a42233053/shelby-estate-wi... ).
Anyways, use of Darth Vader in any work would be a derivative work.
Re:Stable Diffusion copyright lawsuits could be a legal eart...
by seydor on Monday April 03, 2023 @12:01PM
(#35426101)
:s/Darth Vader/Di Caprio
Re:Stable Diffusion copyright lawsuits could be a legal eart...
by jstarfish on Monday April 03, 2023 @12:24PM
(#35426624)
> It seems to me there is no way to put this cat back in the bag ever again
Patents. Copyrights. Franchising?
Artists are now experiencing the joy of getting beaten in the market by someone else selling the product they created. It was not allowed to stand in other industries.
Copyright is a necessary evil. Disney may well be the savior of artists in the age of AI. There is no incentive to produce anything original if someone else can just gank it and drown you in volume.
So, nobody has contested them yet. I smell a class-action lawsuit for them from the original makers of their clipart library.
The base model can be trained on open source images. Or people may use adobe's software for that. From just a few images of Darth you can make basically anything, so yes it's quite doable already.
It seems to me there is no way to put this cat back in the bag ever again.
In the case of Darth Vader, there is probably a trademark involved as well, but the vast majority of photos , celebs etc don't have that.