top | item 43406587

(no title)

jarsin | 11 months ago

You left out the big "but". But if ai gets more optimized and automated our current conclusion will be more bolstered.

discuss

order

protocolture|11 months ago

Not really, thats covered well by:

"There may come a time when prompts can sufficiently control expressive elements in AI-generated outputs to reflect human authorship. If further advances in technology provide users with increased control over those expressive elements, a different conclusion may be called for"

Because any "advancement" in this space is predicated on getting tighter control over the requested outcome.

You can already script a local image generator to come up with random images based on text searches or LLM output. Thats already not copyrightable anywhere.

jarsin|11 months ago

The "but" is literally in response to what you quoted.

For example if I code an entire application in c by myself without ai then told ai to redo the whole thing in rust I would retain copyright.

If you just prompt the same application from scratch and accept by in large the outputs. No copyrighht. This is how the vast majority are using it to create new systems not using it as a tool to enhance majority human generated code or images or books etc.

The more it creates from pure prompts the lesser chance you have to claim copyright.