An artist who infamously duped an art contest with an AI image is suing the U.S. Copyright Office over its refusal to register the image’s copyright.

In the lawsuit, Jason M. Allen asks a Colorado federal court to reverse the Copyright Office’s decision on his artwork Theatre D’opera Spatialbecause it was an expression of his creativity.

Reuters says the Copyright Office refused to comment on the case while Allen in a statement complains that the office’s decision “put me in a terrible position, with no recourse against others who are blatantly and repeatedly stealing my work.”

  • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Ahh yes, the camera bullshit. Here we go…

    Yes a photographer is an artist. They need to know light diffusion, locational effects, distance and magnification, aperture, shutter speed, and have a subject prepped and able to take direction. They also have to have an insane understanding of post process editing.

    They don’t simply type a sentence into a computer and get beautiful photographs.

    A child can produce the exact same image by simply typing the exact same sentence into a computer.

    A child cannot be given a camera and be tasked to produce the exact same quality photo of a professional photographer- and succeed.

    So stop with this bullshit comparison. It’s apples and oranges.

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      A child cannot be given a camera and be tasked to produce the exact same quality photo of a professional photographer- and succeed.

      Um. A macaque did. And every photo a child takes with a smartphone is considered to be sufficiently creative as to be a copyrightable work. It doesn’t need to be “good” to be art.

      “What is art” can be a difficult question. But “how difficult was it to create it” is not the answer.

      • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        If a skillless child can reproduce it with no training but a command of their language of origin, it’s not art. You can give a child a camera but they’re not gong to be Ansel Adams. Yet you can give a child a computer and voilà! You have Stable Diffusion.

        I’m not arguing this with you any further.

        • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          If a skillless child can reproduce it with no training but a command of their language of origin, it’s not art.

          The art is in the eye, not the device. People made the same or similar claims about photography. “It’s just reproduction not creation!” “It’s just operating a machine that does all the work!”

          AI is a tool - the person is the creative.

          You may not like the art - but that’s not to say it’s not art. Either way I think it’s a creative work and worthy of at least the option to be considered art.

          • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            In my eye, AI isn’t art and using AI doesn’t make one an artist. In fact I think it’s an insult to at and artists that talentless hacks are now claiming the title when it takes a lifetime to develop a craft to become an artist.

            It’s shameful.

            • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              In my eye Jackson Pollock is a no-talent hack who created meaningless crap that looks like somebody left a 2yr old unsupervised in the arts and crafts room at school. And I think it’s an insult to other artists that his work is so heavily prized.

              But we’re talking about the quality of the work here aren’t we? Not whether it is a work at all. You’re effectively saying that you don’t value the work because it was easy. Which is fine - that’s your value call. But to deny that it’s a creative work at all is an entirely different thing.

              • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                And you’re allowed to think that with no argument from me. But do you see how many people have rushed to tell me how I’m wrong with their shit examples?

                AI isn’t art. It never will be. Using AI doesn’t make someone an artist. This is what I think. And it’s going to have to be okay.

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      Did you read the rest of the comment or did you stop after the first sentence?

      • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        2 months ago

        I didn’t need to. The moment photography was brought up as a comparison, that’s all I needed to know.

        AI is not art. Period.

        • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          2 months ago

          Let’s say I’ve been an artist for 10 years. I take all my work and stick it into an AI model. That model starts generating images based on the art I’ve created in the past 10 years. Have I stopped being an artist because I put down the brush and picked up a keyboard?

          How would a child produce the exact same image if they don’t have my AI model?

          • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            The moment your art was run through AI, it was no longer yours, and no longer art.

            I’m done talking about this. I stated my point, my opinion, and I have no intention to change it. AI is garbage.

            • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              2 months ago

              If you want to be the old man yelling how the world is changing for the worse, go ahead. You are entitled to your conservative opinion.

              • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                2 months ago

                k. Thanks! I have been waiting for weeks for permission from an AI “artist” to be allowed to have an opinion on something.

                You’ve helped me out a lot!