News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Supreme Court Rules Andy Warhol’s Prince Art Is Copyright Infringement. Parent comment

Re:Supreme Court Rules Andy Warhol’s Prince Art Is Copyright... by bitwize on Thursday May 18, 2023 @02:25PM (#35992077)
The threshold in law is "substantial similarity", not an exact copy.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court Rules Andy Warhol’s Prince Art Is Copyright... by cpymchn on Thursday May 18, 2023 @03:30PM (#35992885)
"In the style of..." is not substantially similar enough IMO.

I think a better foundation for generative AI regulation is the moral rights of the artist [1], not copyright law.

But the courts will take years, if ever, to get that far.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights#In_the_United_Sta...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court Rules Andy Warhol’s Prince Art Is Copyright... by freejazz on Thursday May 18, 2023 @05:19PM (#35994186)
Geez - we went from being a category error, to something you disagree with based upon your opinion... what next?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court Rules Andy Warhol’s Prince Art Is Copyright... by anticensor on Saturday May 20, 2023 @05:09AM (#36010418)
You still have a different type of category error: The creator, AI in this case, lacks legal personhood, hence cannot be considered the legal author nor hold copyright.
[ Parent | on HN ]