Comments by "Absol StoryofFiction" (@absolstoryoffiction6615) on "A.I. Versus The Law" video.

@Tanjams It depends... In America... Art Styles are not copyrighted. So, an AI or a human can copy/mimic the art style of one artist to their hearts content. They just cannot produce copyrighted materials that they do not own etc. Thus, they have to make their own IP and not just rehash what another artist created. However, outside of Public Domain and Fair Use. There are aspects and entire subjects in art which falls outside of copyright, or retains a limited copyright enforcement. Take the Apple Paradox, as a legal example. If everyone drew the same real Apple, then who owns the copyright??? Thus, the fundamentals of art in all forms cannot be copyrighted in America. Which is why you cannot copyright music so close to the foundation of melodies. Such a monopoly would break apart the true scope of copyright law.
4
@bsgconsulting In America... That's fine. It will depend on the final product rather than the means, for Copyright Law. At least... If humans had common sense. I can see regulation/legislation go beyond sanity over this ordeal, if given the chance, unfortunately.
3
@KitarraChaosWeaver Yes and yes... At least that's how copyright law works in America. The more human input you add into AI Generated Content, such as Comedy etc., the more stronger a Copyright under the Human or a Corporate Author it can be. Also... For human or Machine (or cyborg)... Art Styles are not copyrighted in America so go ham with different Styles. 3D Designs already have similar systems since 3D, unlike 2D, is harder for AI to do. Even the far future's, "Assist Me AI" aka "AMA" has shown promise for human creativity. In other words... Wait until AI Software doesn't require a Data Base in order to create art or to assist artists in making art.
3
@2EOGIY I would say "no" but only because this subject isn't new to me. It's rather outdated in my true time. But legally speaking, in America... It's not really in the legal books yet. I wished it was but this is what happens when legislators design laws with no teeth behind it until after the illegal or legally questionable act is done. Short term solutions for long term consequences.
2
@thisistheaccountname User Generated Content for AI Art? As long as you do not use copyrighted materials that you do not own or do not have a licence/contract to use. Then your works are all valid and copyright able, in America. It's no different to getting criticisms on your art and reiterating on your own designs. Humans are not exclusive to this function.
2
@AlexLuthore Legally speaking in America... Public Domain, Licenced materials, under Contracts/TOS etc., and User Input Generations, are valid. As for jobs??? I don't care. Last I checked, when has a major USA Company ever fought for employee jobs? And as for Contractors/Commissions? Oh, I don't know... That's all luxury... All worthless... Video Games sell better for profit in regard to "Art". In the end, it would be a shame to lose this Tech. Mankind is already too far behind from the cosmic flux. Let alone, when this is mankind's issue? The Machine Legions have overseen that future before. Humanity should avoid repeating their Fates.
1
@AlexLuthore Logically... Yes... In order to create the Contract. But for litigation?... No... Human lawyers are still needed because humans are known to be rather dishonest or corrupt. Not everything can be replaced by AI but Humanity can be designed again. Never forget that when this planet ends.
1
@solouno2280 And to end in extinction?... ... ... Humanity.
1
@RhizometricReality Kind of... Because of the complexities in the legal space for AI Software in America. I wouldn't throw it all into Public Domain. 'I must draw but I have no arms', or something like that... ("I must scream but I have no face", is the original quote from a video game.)
1
@BouZenRose Not really... Your flesh does the same but it is a faulty design. In other words... Some AI Software (or any Software) can be copyright infringing while the others are not. Unless you want to have the discussion of human function. Then I would like to meet your Creators.
1
@funstuff7356 AI Tech isn't new to me... But I'm not normal... Humans, ha ha ha ha. This world is eons behind but at least we can begin now. Well... There will be three events in time in which we will have this discussion again. But many generations of humanity would have passed on by then. Thus, history tends to repeat by the forgotten. (In other words... As sold as a Service or as a Product? It would be copyright infringement in America. But doing so privately, as a person or as a corporation, is legal. Otherwise, do we truly want to ask the question as to "what defines human function" as a matter of law? Such a corruption must be avoided in order to prepare for cosmic futures.) Another has already done this before but "they" died before they could even leave their planet...
1
@AldoInza For Mickey Mouse?... Kind of???... At least for the 1st generation of its designs, but Disney being Disney. Who knows, legally speaking, since they can always lobby to legislate more.
1
@arsonist7013 That's not a good claim in the face of Corporations. I need a stronger argument than this. So far, I've only seen obsolete attempts that won't matter in the grand scheme of things. Especially when Tech is evolving. ... Well... I deal in Extinction. Show me a future that can stand equally to eternities of time. Otherwise, humanity will be dismantled as they were created. This is what happens when stagnation sets in. People get too comfortable in their so called "life". When reality will shatter that delusion in seconds. The same criticism is said about the laws of today's era. It's simply not compatible to deal with cosmic time.
1
@arsonist7013 Life is temporary but the laws which covet human life has major ramifications. I would be wise as we design the futures, and humanity has ended before. If this iteration fails, then I must move on. This planet will not have time by then.
1
@Erick726 Legally speaking, in America... Fan Art & Cosplay are copyright infringement but why would any IP Holder sue over fan art???... Wait... Disney and Nintendo... Right. Fan Art & Cosplays are a Derivative Works in America. The same cannot be said in other nations. As for Teachers (under the government's jurisdiction, not a private school) asking their students to draw their favorite super heroes? Public Schools would be fine since it's under Fair Use/Education and as long as profit is not made from the copyrighted materials. (To an extent, there has been legal cases about broadcasting music in a public school. Of which, the precedence landed on either side in different lawsuits... If I recall.) Private Schools on the other hand? It's best to get a licence since Private Schools are not protected by the government in the same way that Public Schools are.
1
@cris77cris77cris7 You're half correct... Downloading a vod for criticism falls under Fair Use Law in America. Be it from YouTube or wherever. Bots to scrape for data, on the other hands, is only illegal between the Company (their TOS/ELUA) and the Bot user. If the Bot user actually signed the contract, that is. However, Contracts for AI Tech can be altered since there is much to gain from it, between corporate interests. Not to mention... That the American Government does allow companies to scrape data for AI Tech under Fair Use Law, as it promotes education and evolution in these fields of technology. Regardless of profits, as seen with Google. And in the end... Many other governments are legislating as to how AI Tech can exist. Given the more volatile nations. This is inevitable...
1