Post AcHX8QAeFCXYxGi8dk by deFractal@infosec.exchange
(DIR) More posts by deFractal@infosec.exchange
(DIR) Post #AcGwE4d5YBrhZyqVMm by simon@fedi.simonwillison.net
2023-11-28T17:28:22Z
2 likes, 0 repeats
https://drawfast.tldraw.com/ is really fun and pretty fascinating - it gives you real-time editing of a Stable Diffusion image guided by a prompt and your sketchHere's my attempt at a pelican in a fancy hat
(DIR) Post #AcGwPmnTg1YHkRI3M0 by simon@fedi.simonwillison.net
2023-11-28T17:30:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Back in August: "A work of art created by artificial intelligence without any human input cannot be copyrighted under U.S. law, a U.S. court in Washington, D.C., has ruled."https://www.reuters.com/legal/ai-generated-art-cannot-receive-copyrights-us-court-says-2023-08-21/Does my terrible sketch count as human input? I actually think it should, especially given that I was continually updating the sketch in a two-way feedback "conversation" with the model
(DIR) Post #AcGxi26HcNeWNRLorw by jtlg@mastodon.lawprofs.org
2023-11-28T17:44:47Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@simon In my IP course, I start drawing on the whiteboard and I ask my students to tell me when I've created a copyrightable work. It usually takes about 5-10 seconds. The threshold is really low.
(DIR) Post #AcGyo4UZjpLVUF9mL2 by soviut@hachyderm.io
2023-11-28T17:56:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@simon From what I know about the law, just because you "set the machine in motion" doesn't qualify. For example, if you spin a spirograph, that was the machine performing the pattern, you just set it in motion.
(DIR) Post #AcH0jcwsP044oPP2Ui by cypherfox@mas.to
2023-11-28T18:19:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@simon One of my favorite ways to generate something more ‘human controlled’ for things like icon/logos is to do a first pass render using a tool like DAZ Studio or a basic Photoshop sketch or equivalent tool, and then use Stable Diffusion to refine it.I’m really looking forward to trying that tool.What you’re doing should definitely count as human input, but there’s going to be a whole bunch of court cases to refine this. 😞
(DIR) Post #AcH0y7UbdYcZb45ek4 by markwalker@fosstodon.org
2023-11-28T18:21:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@simon Ok this is very neat!Not as artistic as your pelican, I'm curious about this now
(DIR) Post #AcH4Iw7xO6hqI978DY by resuna@ohai.social
2023-11-28T18:58:48Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@simon OK
(DIR) Post #AcH6YEIsI8ncuqdnDE by gulthaw@mastodon.social
2023-11-28T19:24:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@simon 😱 😱 😞
(DIR) Post #AcHEb2UBU7XAlZmVRg by adamchainz@fosstodon.org
2023-11-28T20:54:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@simon My quick trial on my phone #Django
(DIR) Post #AcHL5MeFgYsLiAKlEW by phillmv@hachyderm.io
2023-11-28T22:07:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@simon i’ve seen demos like this predating the current genAI explosion - i want to say 5 or 6 years ago even - so i *knew* this was possible but i still said “holy shit”
(DIR) Post #AcHX8QAeFCXYxGi8dk by deFractal@infosec.exchange
2023-11-29T00:21:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@simon How does the argument that the sketch being drawn iteratively based on model output qualifies it as sufficient human input to claim copyright in the output differ from the same argument with respect to an LLM prompt being written iteratively based on LLM output? The sketch, like the LLM prompt, constitutes a smaller fraction of the input than the user does of all humans who have ever lived. Shouldn’t degree of right to the output match degree of addition to the input?
(DIR) Post #AcHihz3pcAfmnOgO8W by dneto@mastodon.gamedev.place
2023-11-29T02:31:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@simon I'm very impressed with this tool.It definitely does better with watercolor prompts."Watercolor sportscar"
(DIR) Post #Aca4Wm9tpiiG216Ljc by simon@fedi.simonwillison.net
2023-12-07T23:00:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jtlg have you reviewed the US copyright decision from 3rd September 2023 about that? https://www.copyright.gov/rulings-filings/review-board/docs/Theatre-Dopera-Spatial.pdfI was surprised to see them conclude that "The Board finds that the Work contains more than a de minimis amount of contentgenerated by artificial intelligence (“AI”), and this content must therefore be disclaimed in anapplication for registration"
(DIR) Post #Aca7kme77MkDSYbZNg by jtlg@mastodon.lawprofs.org
2023-12-07T23:36:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@simon If Allen had been willing to disclaim the AI-generated portions of the image and restrict his copyright claim to the authorship in his prompt, this might be a hard case. But since (a) the law is pretty clear that only human-generated content is copyrightable, and (b) he wasn't willing to disclaim the AI-generated portions, the ruling is more about copyright procedure than copyright substance.This paper is pretty interesting on where copyright may be headed: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4517702