190
submitted 19 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) by tonytins@pawb.social to c/tech@pawb.social

The guy who used Midjourney to create an award-winning piece of AI art demands copyright protections.

Excuse me while I go grab my popcorn.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] CoolGirl586@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago
[-] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 13 points 8 hours ago

He’s not an artist though.

[-] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago
[-] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

Text input knuckler

[-] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 20 points 10 hours ago

This is actually the art bit, right? He’s doing conceptual art, like that Banksy that shredded itself upon sale.

[-] nick@midwest.social 8 points 10 hours ago
[-] Lexam@lemmy.ca 36 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

I'm in the same boat. Every time someone reads one of my comments and doesn't pay me for it, that's money out of my pocket. It's a hard life being an internet commenter these days.

[-] x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 9 hours ago

You are now reading mine.

Is this a valid 1:1 exchange? Or are you willing to pay me extra for my response?

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 hours ago

Please accept this drawing of a spider: *

[-] x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 hours ago
[-] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago

You owe them based on word count, line count, and character count.

[-] VinesNFluff@pawb.social 14 points 13 hours ago

[Nelson Laugh]

[-] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 78 points 18 hours ago

First off, stop calling him an AI artist.

[-] thesporkeffect@lemmy.world 6 points 6 hours ago

The term is apparently prompt-fondler now.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 8 points 11 hours ago

Calling someone a prompt "engineer" should be punishable by law.

[-] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

meanwhile startups: prompt coder/wizard!

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 3 points 8 hours ago

please call them rockstars i want to see them suffer the way real programmers did

[-] Hydra_Fk@reddthat.com -2 points 7 hours ago

It's literally what they are !

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 points 2 hours ago

Fun Fact: PE is actually a legally protected title (the P in a real engineer's title stands for professional)

[-] Mango@lemmy.world 6 points 14 hours ago

Yeah, he is neither is those words. I wouldn't even say the 'I' applies.

[-] NateNate60@lemmy.world 6 points 17 hours ago

But...

The AI is the artist!

Not sure what this other guy is doing though.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 46 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

One of the reasons I like AI art is that it's pretty settled law that something produced by purely "mechanical" means can't itself have copyright, since copyright requires both originality and a human author.

It seems like a reasonably compromise, the AI was created by hoovering up the commons, so anything it creates should belong to the commons. I expect a lot of lobbying in the future to try and change it though.

[-] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 19 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

And if AI work would be copyrighted by the "prompt artist" then all the artists whose work is in the training set can sue the prompter for profiting of their work without licensing fees. It would be a legal clusterfuck so it was pretty wise to side step the whole issue.

[-] AFreeLarryHoover@lemmy.world 38 points 18 hours ago
[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

AI art might not be real, but Sonic giving birth to Borat is an extremely cool concept that people should be celebrated for drawing

[-] sag@lemm.ee 19 points 16 hours ago

If he is considered "Artist" I am too.

[-] Mango@lemmy.world 9 points 14 hours ago

LMAO!!!!

Next.

[-] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 27 points 18 hours ago

Oh no, the consequences of your own actions! That art competition should just add a rule "only copyrightable works"

[-] tonytins@pawb.social 11 points 18 hours ago

Apparently, the competition was a year before that ruling.

[-] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 4 points 15 hours ago

And he's still crying about it?

[-] TommySoda@lemmy.world 22 points 18 hours ago

"Famous AI 'Prompter' Says He's Losing Millions of Dollars From People Stealing His Stolen Work."

Seems like you did this to yourself, bud. You're just mad you didn't get paid enough for stealing.

[-] Repelle@lemmy.world 4 points 14 hours ago

“Famous” is accurate, but change to “Infamous” and it’s perfect.

[-] tonytins@pawb.social 2 points 11 hours ago

He sure to become "infamous" now.

[-] unmagical@lemmy.ml 16 points 18 hours ago

How is he losing millions of dollars? If you're just trying to get into the art fraud money laundering scheme thing then make an NFT and find an idiot. But just the creation of a piece (be it traditional, digital, or "ai") doesn't entitle you to a payout. And if you're just complaining about the dissemination of the piece you asked someone else's computer to generate for you without a kick back link tax, well--that's not how copyright, the internet, or normal human correspondence works.

[-] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 18 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Ah, good ol' music industry math. "1,000 people downloaded a picture that I created, and I wanted to charge $1,000 a piece, so I lost $1,000,000." In reality of course charging $0.02 would've stopped most sales.

[-] unmagical@lemmy.ml 4 points 17 hours ago

Yeah, articles are including the image because they can. If a judge had instead ruled that AI generated works were copyrightable (and to the prompter, not the designer of the tool, owner of the hardware, or even the tool itself) the end result would be that very few orgs would include his piece instead just opting for generating their own (now copyrightable) image to use as an example. He'd still get nothing, but then significantly fewer people would see his "work."

[-] Canadian_Cabinet@lemmy.ca 15 points 18 hours ago

How much did the real artists lose out on in order to train the AI?

[-] morgunkorn@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 19 hours ago

I'm collecting all his tears to cook a big pot of pasta. Not sure how anyone would make "millions of dollars" from a single artwork anyway.

[-] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 4 points 14 hours ago

its probably fictionally calculated like sales are to piracy. just because someone pirated a game/software doesnt mean they would have bought said thing at asking price had the piracy option not existed.

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago

Be an 1880 impressionnist, paint an artwork, die.

Now it's worth a million, possibly.

[-] drwho@beehaw.org 4 points 17 hours ago

Money laundering.

[-] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

This is the schadenfreude I needed to get through my day

[-] SacredHeartAttack@lemmy.world 13 points 18 hours ago

lol get fucked loser. (the "artist", not OP)

[-] OmegaMouse@pawb.social 15 points 19 hours ago

Lol, lmao even

[-] blackjam_alex@lemmy.world 7 points 17 hours ago

He's losing imaginary, A.I generated money.

[-] drdiddlybadger@pawb.social 9 points 18 hours ago

He is not being the neighborly neighbor Mr Rogers wanted him to be.

[-] ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social 7 points 18 hours ago

Oh I sure hope he sets a bad legal precedent for AI "art".

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024
190 points (94.4% liked)

Furry Technologists

1293 readers
383 users here now

Science, Technology, and pawbs

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS