Login

The Real Marty · 05-05-2023, 08:36 AM

(05-05-2023, 07:57 AM)mikesez Wrote:
(05-05-2023, 06:36 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: I don't think that would be workable. A person could do the slightest bit of editing and claim the copyright. Sort of like those paintings that are machine made, but then a person at the factory puts a few brush strokes on it and it's sold as one-of-a-kind.

Besides, how "AI generated" would a work have to be to be called "AI generated?" 90%? 80%? And how could you tell?

It wouldn't solve every problem but it should prevent many. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Another thing we need to implement, yesterday, is a sort of digital signature on all cameras, so that the files they record can be reliably traced back to a recording device. Many devices have something like this, but it should be a requirement going forward, and more robust. And a software that edits the file should have to place its own signature. If a bad guy tries to use AI to make a public figure appear to say something they never said, their video file would lack those signatures.

You edited it. You originally said, "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the goof." Which I thought was a pretty good line. You should have kept that.

(05-05-2023, 08:13 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: Have you guys worked with AI at all? It's not like it just makes things perfectly when you ask. You have to frame and reframe each idea. I'm fine with copyrights being available with AI. Maybe someone who knows better than me can tell me why it shouldn't be allowed.

Great point. We've had computer programs that help you write computer programs for many years, and we still get a copyright on the code.