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.”

    • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      Most AI art haters only hate it after they’ve learned it’s made by AI. In reality it’s next to impossible to tell a well made AI art from human made digital art for example. Ofcourse everyone claims they can immediately tell the difference but even they know they’re kidding themselves. It’s gatekeeping, pure and simple.

      There’s plenty of really good AI art and generating it is not as simple as they often make it to be.

      • RandomVideos@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        The problem isnt that the art is bad. It feeling like its made by AI doesnt ruin the art

        The problem is that it is made by AI, that the art has a negligible amount of effort put into it

        • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          As a photographer I feel like the same thing could be said of it. Especially when talking about film or polaroid cameras, it doesn’t take much longer than a few seconds to take the picture. I can’t even write a prompt for gen-AI in that time.

      • macniel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Gatekeeping? Nah, it’s not as it’s quite easy for AI Bros to pick up a pencil. Nobody, except disabilities, stops them.

        And yeah AI slop has become so well that rabid people are accusing actual artists that their art was made by AI. But why is that? Certainly not because their previous art was trained on…

        Fuck AI. It is used to replace actual humans and human creativity.

        • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          AI is not an artist any more than a paint brush is. Neither can generate anything on their own. They’re tools.

          • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            Oh I’d be careful, that undermines the “the AI is an artist in itself” - defense of companies against plagiarism charges. Because otherwise if we go with that, most material would not be allowed as sources for training. The vast majority in fact.

            Better let the AI be an artist, that way it’s legal if it steals from others works, but that also means I can critique it as, well, being shit and just doing derivative works. 😛

            • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              AI doesn’t copy pre-existing art. It’s influenced by it. Human artists take influence from prior artwork just as well as AI does. Nobody is creating art in a vacuum.