2023 years 2 month 21 day, According to the U. S. Copyright Office, Chris the Artist．Kashtanova (Kris Kashtanova) It's powered by artificial intelligence Midjourney Image generator for comic books "Charia at dawn (Zarya of the Dawn) " The images created should not have been copyrighted, The copyright protection on these images should therefore be lifted.

The copyright office registered the original copyright in a letter sent to Kashtanova's lawyer "Incomplete information" As a reason for cancelling its original registration, And issued a new registration certificate excluding copyright protection for images generated by artificial intelligence. The new register covers only the text of the work and the arrangement of pictures and text. At first, Kashtanova did not disclose that the images were created by AI models.

Letter stating: "Our conclusion is this, Kashtanova is the author of the text, It is also the choice of text and visual elements of the work, The author of coordination and choreography. The author's identity is protected by copyright. however, In the works Midjourney The images generated by technology are not the product of human authors. "

2022 years 9 month, Kashtanova declared publicly, "Charia at dawn" Copyright registration has been obtained, These include the use of potentially diffuse artificial intelligence (latent diffusion AI) Method tips for generating comic illustrations. At that time, The public saw it as a precedent for the registration of works of art created using potentially proliferating technology.

however, As explained in the letter, The copyright office learned through Kashtanova's social media posts that the work contained images generated by artificial intelligence, Office in 2022 years 10 Kashtanova was notified in September, Says she should not cancel the registration unless she provides additional information about why, Otherwise, the copyright Office intends to cancel the registration of the image. Kashtanova's lawyer is here 11 Moon replied to the letter, Calling Kashtanova the author of all aspects of the work, while Midjourney Just as an aid.

This argument is not enough for the Copyright Office, Did the Copyright Office detail why it believes that art generated by artificial intelligence should not be protected by copyright.

The Copyright Office reached its conclusion based on the records it received, Included in the work Midjourney The resulting image is not an original copyrighted work. Despite Kashtanova's claims "guide" The structure and content of each image, But the process described in Kashtanova's material makes it clear, is Midjourney It wasn't Kashtanova who established the image "Traditional elements of authorship" .

The overall argument in the Copyright Office letter could serve as an important legal precedent for people trying to copyright images generated by AI in the future.

Kashtanova is in Instagram In response to the letter, She sees it as an overall victory for AI-enhanced artists. She pointed out that, The ruling is that "Good news" , Because it preserves the story and graphics of comic books, "It covers a variety of uses in the art world of AI" .

But on the issue of losing copyright protection for individual images, Kashtanova said she would not give up the fight:

"I was disappointed in one aspect of the decision. The copyright Office did not agree to recognize my rights to individual images. I don't think they understand some of the technology, And that led to a bad decision. Fundamentally speaking, The output of a generative AI model depends directly on the creative input of the artist, It's not random. My lawyers are considering their options, To further explain to the Copyright Office Midjourney The images made are a direct expression of my creativity, So it's copyrighted. "

This is despite the fact that there is a precedent for early algorithm-generated art to be copyrighted, But the ruling means that, Images generated by artificial intelligence without human elements of creation cannot currently be copyrighted in the United States. The copyright office's ruling on the matter is likely to remain unchanged, Unless it goes to court, To be amended by law or reexamined in the future.

Industry insiders point out that, As the way society views the art generated by artificial intelligence shifts, The ruling may be reconsidered in the future. Different members of the US Copyright Office may be in the future 10 A new interpretation will be made this year. For the time being, Ai-powered art is still a new and lesser-known technology, But it could eventually become the standard way visual art appears. (Compiled from arstechnica. com)

translation: Rason group　proofread: Liu Peng



　　disclaimer: This network reprint or compile the original article from the Internet, Does not represent the views of this website or confirm the authenticity of its content. If the source is mislabeled or the copyright of the article is involved, Please contact this website, This network will be corrected in due course, delete, thank you.