Win / KotakuInAction2
KotakuInAction2
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
KotakuInAction2 The Official Gamergate Forum
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

60
AI-Created Art Isn’t Copyrightable, Judge Says In Ruling That Could Give Hollywood Studios Pause (archive.fo)
posted 2 years ago by LeRiverDanube 2 years ago by LeRiverDanube +60 / -0
36 comments share
36 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (36)
sorted by:
▲ 42 ▼
– Arkana 42 points 2 years ago +42 / -0

AI art is basically the same as 3D art. You can use premade models by other people and edit it to be however you want. You can look at Getting Over It and Only Up, both games made with asset store stuff but very different quality.

That being said, copyright is garbage anyways. People went thousands of years with their folk stories being told and retold, imagine how many would have been cut short because somebody "owned" that story.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 42 ▼
– Tourgen 42 points 2 years ago +42 / -0

100% agree. trash copyright laws. all of them. keep patent laws: 7 years max and not transferable from original individual(s). if the company wants to keep the idea they can pay the person(s) that created them.

copyright was supposed to fund new works of art by funding the original creator. that was a jewish lie. what these laws have done is enrich middlemen, speculators, and lawyers.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 17 ▼
– Arkana 17 points 2 years ago +17 / -0

Yeah a small period like that is fine. Most of the money is made during that period anyways. Being able to buy the copyright for something with none of the original creators involved is very nonsensical.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 5 ▼
– elleand202 5 points 2 years ago +5 / -0

Yeah a small period like that is fine.

The Constitution says "...securing for limited times to authors..." The original copyright law in the U.S. was for 7 years and allowed a one time extension for another 7 years. I think that's reasonable. The current law is ridiculous though, life of the author plus 70 years. There's no way that life+70 is a "limited time".

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 9 ▼
– Assassin47 9 points 2 years ago +9 / -0

I tend to agree considering the current broken state of law, though I think the "middlemen, speculators, and lawyers" is the real crux of the problem here, so take that out of the equation and I'm actually fine with a perpetual copyright for the life of the author - as long as he's still selling the original work. Revised editions don't count, and no transferring to other parties. (but feel free to license exclusive rights to a big company while you're alive)

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 14 ▼
– dzonatan 14 points 2 years ago +14 / -0

There's no such thing as taking reality out of the equation.

That's why you draft laws while taking into consideration how it could be abused.

Murphy's Law and all that.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 12 ▼
– Xachariah 12 points 2 years ago +12 / -0

Just make it a set number of years.

Making it for the life of the author means that amoral "middlemen, speculators, and lawyers" would just kill you if it's cheaper than licensing.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 19 ▼
– AlfredicEnglishRules 19 points 2 years ago +19 / -0

I agree with this. The people using IP to the insane levels they are now make art creation difficult. Art means trading ideas back and forth to create a new form, not greedily hiding it away and barely using it.

On the other hand, if we got rid of the copyright laws and all that, there would be a shit porn version of Mario Bros on PS5 tomorrow. Companies want to destroy IP laws so they can squander good stories and ideas.

It doesn't matter what you do, there will always be an asshole.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 5 ▼
– when_we_win_remember 5 points 2 years ago +5 / -0

It should only take a modicum of human input to make at least the final product copyrightable. I suppose it would be a derivative work of the AI, but we just said the AI portion doesn't get copyright.

permalink parent save report block reply

Original 8chan Links to Gamer Gate:

.

The main GG discussion is on the videogames board: https://8chan.moe/v/

.

GamerGate archive is at https://8chan.moe/gamergatehq/

.

GamerGate Wiki:

https://ggwiki.deepfreeze.it/index.php/Main_Page

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

Rules:

.

ONE: Do not advocate for illegal violence or post other illegal activity. (Be aware of your local laws.)

.

TWO: Don't threaten, harass, or impersonate users. Also: don't be a psycho. New users will be held to a higher standard.

.

THREE: Do not post porn.

.

FOUR: NSFW/NSFL content must be flaired NSFW.

.

FIVE: No vote manipulation. Do not break communities.win's features.

.

SIX: No spam or reposts. Do not make more than 5 threads a day.

.

SEVEN: Do not post falsehoods and hoaxes that are obvious to an uncontroversial degree.

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

Moderation Logs:

.

(Two different versions, Scored has more features and is cleaner, but .win let's you see a few more details in certain instances.)

  • Scored
  • .win

Moderators

  • DomitiusOfMassilia
  • C
  • BandageBandolier
  • CarmenOfSandiego
  • The_Shadow_of_Intent
  • SocraticMethod1
  • Kienan
  • Smith1980
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2026.02.01 - whmbz (status)

Copyright © 2026.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy