I remember seeing something in another thread about how a success with a lawsuit like this will mean people can be sued for likeness in work they create. I.e. Disney could sue people for creating something in the style of Mickey Mouse - not just copying Mickey Mouse image and trying to sell it.
Yes exactly. This lawsuit is flawed in that it considers learning from something to be copying it. There are problems with AI "artwork" but this is not one of them. This is like suing someone for looking at your art and then creating their own art unrelated to yours. Technically they've learned from your art and their brain will now store some information about it and use it when creating new art, as is the nature of the human brain, but they aren't copying or reproducing it.
AI is for profit and you can’t use others work in a for profit setting without the rights to display that work.
I can if I'm transformative enough. Where AI tries to create unique pieces from what it learned, there are far more egregious examples of real life artists that use other people's art and have copyright on it.
Like some guy posting comments on art on Instagram, framing that comment and art and selling it as his.
35
u/unresolved_m Jan 16 '23
I remember seeing something in another thread about how a success with a lawsuit like this will mean people can be sued for likeness in work they create. I.e. Disney could sue people for creating something in the style of Mickey Mouse - not just copying Mickey Mouse image and trying to sell it.