RE: [PATCH] [v2] Documentation: Provide guidelines for tool-generated content

"Luck, Tony" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.ksummit,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.workflows
Message-ID <SJ1PR11MB6083B928B445DF82EE5AE3EEFCCEA@SJ1PR11MB6083.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
> I believe that's what is currently being argued in court. If AI is trained
> on human content and prints out something based on it, is it a non-human
> creation?  This isn't a case of a monkey taking a selfie, where the content
> provider is clearly non-human. This is a machine that uses human created
> content to derive new creations.

If the output were deemed copyrightable, who should own that copyright?

Option 1 is "The human that crafted the prompt to generate it"

Option 2 is "The corporation that spent vast resources to create that AI model"

Option 3 is "The owners of the copyrighted material used to train the AI".

If a court ever must decide which to pick, it may well pick the answer requested
by the best funded legal team (which would be option 2).

-Tony
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.