• jarfil@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right now, it kind of does. Like if you took someone else’s work and claimed it as your own: unless they can prove it’s theirs, first one to claim it gets to own the copyright.

      Unfair? You bet. There’s things like SafeCreative that has been running for many years (I used to be part of a precursor to that) or even register it as an NFT to have a proof of precedence.

        • jarfil@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Current copyright law doesn’t require proving anything other than priority of registration/publication.

          Someone can clam it’s AI all they want, they would have to prove it’s AI. Good luck with that (unless they have the exact model, prompt and seed).

          LPT: if you want to publish a game on Steam with AI-generated assets… don’t tell anyone they’re AI-generated, register them to get your copyright, and present that as proof to Steam when asked.

          BTW, creation progress and “commit logs”, can also be faked.

            • jarfil@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Current copyright law doesn’t require proving anything other than priority of registration/publication.

              Current copyright law doesn’t require registration or publication in the USA.

              sue them in court and thus you are suing them and the onus is on YOU to make your case that you hold the copyright.

              Precisely: while copyright doesn’t require registration or publication to exist, it does require it to prove in court that it exists. Its abstract existence is moot by itself.

              If you generate some AI art, and register or publish it as your own, that’s the only proof you (currently) need in court to sue anyone who’d copy it.

              Regarding Steam, my guess is they’re only gonna CYA and ask you for a statement of ownership, so they can throw you under the bus if anyone comes up with proof that you used AI to generate your assets. (One such proof could be publishing a YouTube video boasting how your game uses AI generated art… don’t do that).

              Game studios are definitely going to publish games with AI art, they’ll just “forget” to disclose it was AI generated, and if they get some whistleblower, they’ll claim that their copyright is on their transformative use.

              If Steam wants to retract all games like that, just wait and see how many will fall.

                • jarfil@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Hey, you just stole my business model! (jk… or am I 🤔)

                  But seriously, just yesterday I saw a news blurb on TV about a studio making a game with AI-based characters like Einstein, Sagan, and similar, trained on all their published documents and public appearances. As far as I know, the Einstein real estate is a really greedy bunch of folks, charging through the nose for any material related to him… and I have my doubts they got a license for Sagan or the others either.

                  Just eager to see how that one plays out.