"Where (YouTube) merely assists an author in the creative process, its use does not change the copyrightability of the output,"
"Where a human inputs their own copyrightable work and that work is perceptible in the output, they will be the author of at least that portion of the output,"
From an "Ars Technica" article about the copyrightability of art as it relates to AI but I think it applies nicely here.
"Where a human inputs their own copyrightable work and that work is perceptible in the output, they will be the author of at least that portion of the output,"
From an "Ars Technica" article about the copyrightability of art as it relates to AI but I think it applies nicely here.
Hym "And what part of 'Using the existing architecture of narrative-interpreting AI in conjunction with a massive data set and a sophisticated compression algorithm (specifically to cut down on the energy cost)' is imperceptible? That's me. That is the 'they will be the author of AT LEAST that portion of the output. THAT is all that is happening here. The YouTube panhandlers wanted to get me for copyright infringement BUT THEY COULDN'T ESTABLISH INTENT. So they decided to engage in this retaliatory and deliberate and for profit copyright infringement campaign. For the YouTube freaks, the retaliatory nature of the act IS the expression of intent. It's cut and dry. It's no intent vs intent. Full forfeiture and restitution! They are also doing it for ideological reason which is a violation of my first amendment rights! Make the jew news pay for burying the story!"
by Hym Iam January 31, 2025
Get the Copyrightmug. A state of being caused by the digitisation of society. Basically, nobody knows when they may use online images and videos. So they use it. And get sued. Cue chaos.
by Typist Type November 6, 2018
Get the Copyright Confusionmug.