Re:Japan Goes All In: Copyright Doesn’t Apply to AI Training
by numpad0 on Wednesday May 31, 2023 @07:08PM
(#36145696)
I'm generally against "AI same as human learning" argument but I don't think you could quite monetize recreated copyrighted arts as an art student. Van Gogh is only okay because the original artist isn't quite around.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Japan Goes All In: Copyright Doesn’t Apply to AI Training
by nancyhn on Wednesday May 31, 2023 @07:26PM
(#36145844)
Can anyone monetize Van Gogh regardless?
If a human or AI reproduces a Van Gogh painting or derivative, it's not worth anything on the market.
Only original pieces, by a human artist, has value. A Van Gogh painting is worth millions of dollars only because it was created by Van Gogh.
Re:Japan Goes All In: Copyright Doesn’t Apply to AI Training
by dendrite9 on Wednesday May 31, 2023 @07:39PM
(#36145947)
Re:Japan Goes All In: Copyright Doesn’t Apply to AI Training
by pseudo0 on Wednesday May 31, 2023 @07:52PM
(#36146065)
The copies are commodities, produced and sold for approximately the cost of production. The original is a one of a kind, unique work that has its value increased by millions of imitations hanging on people's walls.
That's the way I see AI-generated work going in the long run. The artists who have distinctive styles popular for image generation have seen a huge surge in attention, which I suspect will translate into making their original work more valuable.