Originally published at: AI artist appeals denial of copyright protection - Boing Boing
…
5 Likes
Tough shit, thief.
25 Likes
25 Likes
There’s a good reason that none of my own art is posted on my IG account. Alas, there’s nothing I can do about any work that was scraped from Deviant Art; hindsight is 20/20.
At least I didn’t have a ton of my work posted there…
19 Likes
I have removed my art from IG. I care less about my photos of things, those are far less my own “work”, but nobody gets to take my art. Unfuck those thieves and resource-destroyers.
19 Likes
Agreed, emphatically.
12 Likes
here’s the image Allen says Midjourney generated
Bwahahahahaha! snort He’s really not doing his argument any favors by making claims that are such obvious bald-faced lies. I guess he’s decided that “feeding an algorithm some prompts” wasn’t likely to be accepted for a copyright claim, so now he’s claiming that, just coincidentally, he not only painted in a bunch of details that are totally in the style of that generation of AI model, but a bunch of details that don’t make any sort of sense, visually or otherwise. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on. (The crowning irony being that the presented “original” image looks like it underwent far more human manipulation - even if it was just some blur filters - than the supposed human-assembled image, that’s clearly untouched AI output.)
I wish I knew what his prompts were, to see what MJ would spit out now. I imagine it would be completely different. (Edit: which just further undermines claims of authorship with generated images. If the final image has radically different outcomes despite your contributions being identical, and it’s not a process-centric work, where you came up with the process, your creative contributions don’t remotely rise to the level where you can claim any sort of ownership over the resulting image.)
3 Likes
It really doesn’t. She just didn’t like the ruling. The court’s decision is pretty straightforward and doesn’t leave much room for ambiguity.
11 Likes
I didn’t- the machines aren’t out there doing things without human investment and direction.
If I start my car and put a brick on the accelerator- it’s still a crime a human is responsible for if it hits someone.
8 Likes
9 Likes
5 Likes
5 Likes
I should clarify, though, that theft isn’t really a legal term. It kind of is. From a legal standpoint, it’s synonymous with larceny. Theft, however, is also a common language term. There are many forms of “theft” in the law. There’s larceny, robbery, conversion, embezzlement, larceny by trick, larceny by false pretenses, and yes, copyright infringement, patent infringement, and trademark infringement. Those last three are theft of intellectual property. In a way, it’s not theft, because the original property is still in the hands of the original owner. But it is theft in that you are depriving that owner of the financial benefits of owning that copyright, patent, or trademark.
13 Likes
It’s stealing profit and prestige/reputation rather than stealing physical possessions… but that still counts in my book (and in, many cases, the lawbooks too!)
Whether someone steals my ideas or steals my car, it’s still stealing.
11 Likes
Absolutely.
8 Likes
“AI is an insult to life” (c) Hayao Miyazaki, a real artist with a massive canon of genuine work behind him.
6 Likes
doesnt help his case when the “original” blurry one has 930x618px, while the “overpainted” is 2048px width and a cropped height of 1365px. 2048x2048 is exactly the maximum size midjourney can generate, even in 2022. uncropped, native 930x930px doesnt fit anything in the list of sizes (assuming original size of pics beschizza posted above);
The default Midjourney resolutions are 512×512 (image variations), 1024×1024 (upscale), 1664×1664 (upscale to max), and 2048×2048 (beta upscale redo).
3 Likes
Hahahaha, oh dear. So the image they claim is direct output of MJ not only is visually completely unlike what MJ was capable of doing, but it’s not even a size format it could output, whereas the supposed human assembled one is, in every respect, exactly the sort of thing that it directly put out. I think my rejoinder to their claim of authorship would have to be, “No you fucking didn’t.”
I don’t know about at the time the image was made, but “AI” image generators now can take an image as input and elaborate on it, so he could have generated an image, cropped and blurred it, and then fed it back into the system to create the final image. But that doesn’t help the copyright claim any, plus there would be an added “AI dog eating its own vomit” quality to the whole thing, too.
2 Likes
Still, kudos to Midjourney’s programmers for choosing the classic square photographic format. Did they add a Hasselblad notch as well?
3 Likes
