News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on AI-generated art can't be copyrighted (Supreme Court declines review). Parent comment

Re:AI-generated art can't be copyrighted (Supreme Court decl... by freejazz on Tuesday March 03, 2026 @04:19PM (#47239177)
> If some toddler spends two hours on a drawing, it's a masterpiece?

A work doesn't have to be a masterpiece to obtain a copyright so what difference does it make? The point of copyright isn't to subjectively critique art.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AI-generated art can't be copyrighted (Supreme Court decl... by tgv on Wednesday March 04, 2026 @01:14AM (#47243786)
The prompt itself may be copyrighted.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AI-generated art can't be copyrighted (Supreme Court decl... by freejazz on Wednesday March 04, 2026 @10:00AM (#47248477)
What matter is whether or not its a masterpiece?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AI-generated art can't be copyrighted (Supreme Court decl... by tgv on Thursday March 05, 2026 @02:33PM (#47266191)
The output is mechanically derived from the prompt. There's zero artistry or creativity involved, and despite all the posturing, those are more or less hard requirements for copyright. The prompt may meet the criteria and be copyrighted.
[ Parent | on HN ]