Back in 2022, when AI image generators were new and interesting, an AI artwork won the Colorado State Fair’s Fine Art Competition and gained some recognition. The judges were not aware that it was created using MidJourney. In fact, I didn’t realize what MidJourney was (MidJourney is included in our pick of the best AI art generators).
Artists were furious, and the incident became a bit of a poster story for the debate over the merits of AI art and how it should be treated. This also became a test case for the question of whether AI art is copyrightable. And the problem is still not solved or dusted.
(Image credit: Jason Allen via Midjourney)
When Jason Allen submitted his bombastically named “Opera Space” to the U.S. Copyright Office, they weren’t as easily fooled as Colorado judges. It was decided that images generated by AI cannot be copyrighted in their entirety because they lack the key element of being a “human work of authorship.” At best, the authorities determined, Allen could obtain copyright for certain parts of the work. He worked on his own work in Photoshop.
Now, he has launched an appeal against the decision, arguing that the “624 iterations” at Midjourney required at least 110 hours of human labor. In a discussion that many artists would find ironic, he also claims that he has lost “millions of dollars” due to unauthorized use of his work.
“The Copyright Office’s refusal to register the Théâtre de Opéra Spatial leaves me in a terrible position, and I have nothing to say about others who blatantly and repeatedly plagiarize my work without compensation or credit. ” If there’s anything oddly familiar about this argument, it’s that a group of various artists are suing the developer of an AI image generator for using their work as training data without their permission. It may be because there is.
Allen’s fantasy science fiction scenes were fairly typical of the types of images being produced by Midjourney at the time. He enlarged it and further edited it in Photoshop. But Allen’s lawyers argue that guiding the AI to create the initial images is an act of human creativity comparable to that of a director directing a movie.
“The U.S. Copyright Office’s refusal to recognize human copyright in AI-assisted creations highlights serious problems in modern intellectual property law,” said IP attorney Tamara Pester. As AI continues to evolve, it is essential that our legal frameworks adapt to protect it.” People’s right to use these technologies for creative expression. ”
Daily design news, reviews, how-tos, and more, chosen by our editors.
Court rejects Stephen Saylor’s appeal of the U.S. Copyright Office’s refusal to copyright this AI-generated image (Image credit: Stephen Saylor)
It remains to be seen whether the court will be satisfied. In another case, Saylor v. Perlmutter, the court upheld a decision denying copyright to AI-generated works. This issue remains a factor limiting the appeal of AI image generators for commercial use, as most brands and professional artists are unlikely to understand the value of images that are not protected by copyright and can be freely copied by anyone. It is one of the
Theater D’Opera Spatial isn’t the only AI image causing headaches for art competition judges. Photo contest judges have even banned real photos they thought were generated by AI. For more information, check out our roundup of AI art tutorials.
Source link
