A federal judge on Friday upheld a finding from the U.S. Copyright Office that a piece of art created by AI is not open to protection.

“In March, the copyright office affirmed that most works generated by AI aren’t copyrightable but clarified that AI-assisted materials qualify for protection in certain instances. An application for a work created with the help of AI can support a copyright claim if a human “selected or arranged” it in a “sufficiently creative way that the resulting work constitutes an original work of authorship,” it said.”

Thaler was appealing this, and his appeal was denied.

    • DrYes@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      So I read the article and the lawsuit has nothing to do with my question. It’s more about precedent and actually finding out what the laws are if everything is as claimed.

      Still think detectability is an interesting question.

      • Ragnell@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, but detectability isn’t a new question, is it? It’s just a twist on the old question of “Did someone else create it other than the guy who claimed it?”