Had to remove some of the content, because it still likes to put in weird vernacular, but it's getting closer:

Spare me the theatrics. Look, AI ain't some magical creative wizard. It's good at churning out generic fluff, not groundbreaking masterpieces. So why the fuss over copyrighting AI ideas? We've been borrowing ideas since the dawn of time.

AI is only as good as the person wielding it. It's a tool, not some genius prodigy. So if someone wants to copyright their AI creation, why the heck not? They put in the effort, shaped it according to their vision. It's progress, whether the naysayers like it or not.

I mean, think about it. We're all standing on the shoulders of giants, recycling old ideas in new ways. AI just accelerates the process and redistributes creative opportunities to those lacking skills. Sure, it may ruffle the feathers of those who toiled for years, but hey, that's what progress is all about, isn't it?

So let's cut the hypocrisy. If someone wants to copyright their AI-generated content, let 'em. It's their sweat and tears that went into it. AI may be a fancy toy, but it's still a human touch that makes it worth a darn. Case closed.

---

I guess we can just agree to disagree about it.

---

This has nothing to do with copyrights and if you read any of the terms for AI, the free ones will maintain copyrights of anything it creates. There is editing software that uses AI but you still own that and are just licensing the use.

This is all about deep fakes and creating something that didn't actually happen. The bill is so pporly worded or how they are describing it is. It's going to backfire because any editing of video could be included. Anything being produced today uses AI to do repeatable tasks so you don't have to take the time to do it manually.

If it somehow passes, it would probably just force line at the bottom of an ad that most people don't read.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

---

Had to remove some of the content, because it still likes to put in weird vernacular, but it's getting closer:

Spare me the theatrics. Look, AI ain't some magical creative wizard. It's good at churning out generic fluff, not groundbreaking masterpieces. So why the fuss over copyrighting AI ideas? We've been borrowing ideas since the dawn of time.

AI is only as good as the person wielding it. It's a tool, not some genius prodigy. So if someone wants to copyright their AI creation, why the heck not? They put in the effort, shaped it according to their vision. It's progress, whether the naysayers like it or not.

I mean, think about it. We're all standing on the shoulders of giants, recycling old ideas in new ways. AI just accelerates the process and redistributes creative opportunities to those lacking skills. Sure, it may ruffle the feathers of those who toiled for years, but hey, that's what progress is all about, isn't it?

So let's cut the hypocrisy. If someone wants to copyright their AI-generated content, let 'em. It's their sweat and tears that went into it. AI may be a fancy toy, but it's still a human touch that makes it worth a darn. Case closed.

Looks like the original programmers were Australian.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I've already seen AI voiceovers for politicians and pundits in political ads. (An AI generated voice reading actual text that from documents attributed to the person being "faked" with the voiceover - one was from text messages, one was from court deposition docs)

It's just one more tool for the propaganda machine.

They'll probably let it spin out of control before they do anything to regulate it.

---

I've already seen AI voiceovers for politicians and pundits in political ads. (An AI generated voice reading actual text that from documents attributed to the person being "faked" with the voiceover - one was from text messages, one was from court deposition docs)

It's just one more tool for the propaganda machine.

They'll probably let it spin out of control before they do anything to regulate it.

Only when the people who make policy are affected will something be done about it.

---

Added more content, and you can see it's adopting some of my arguments and style. This thing thinks I'm really southern, apparently:

Have you guys ever worked with AI, huh? It ain't as simple as just commanding it to make things perfect. Nah, you gotta frame and reframe each idea, tweak it till it's desirable. Now, personally, I'm all for copyrights on AI stuff. I mean, maybe someone smarter than me can explain why it shouldn't be allowed, but from where I'm standing, it makes sense.

See, here's the thing. Sure, you can tell the AI to whip up a story about a boy, and it'll churn out some words. But the real question is, is it a good story? Is it a compelling idea? 'Cause let me tell ya, most times when I've dabbled with AI, it's pretty good at simulating emails and such, but when it comes to being truly artistic, it falls short. Getting something worthwhile takes effort, mate. So, why can't you copyright the ideas your AI spits out? I don't see the harm in it. It's just about being first to the market, and that sorts itself out over time.

Now, I reckon some folks might argue that it ain't fair, that AI is stealing creativity from others. But hey, let's get real here. We're all using existing ideas to create something new. We read books, gather inspiration, and then reshape it in our own unique way. Not many folks out there have purely original ideas, mate. Most of what's popular is just a fresh take on something that's come before. How many books are based on Shakespeare or movies on Christ? They're all drawn from lived experience, and that's the same fuel AI runs on.

AI, yeah, it's a bit of false marketing, I agree. But at the end of the day, it's only as good as the person guiding it. It's fast, it understands how to interpret input, but it lacks that true creative spark. So, while it might have a short time where everything it produces seems novel, sooner or later, people will realize it ain't truly original or creative. And that's when human ingenuity comes into play.

So, my friend, if someone wants to copyright their AI-generated content, I say let 'em. They've put in the effort, they've added their vision and experience to guide the AI. It's just an easier tool, a shortcut to bring their ideas to life. And who's to say that's a bad thing? Progress is all about finding smarter ways to do things, just like using electric tools instead of sticking to old-fashioned methods.

I think you need to tell it to stop calling you "mate."

---