@preibischs I would think the copyright would be owned by the creator of the AI, not the users writing the prompts.
@LouisIngenthron wouldn’t that somehow be equivalent to parents having ownership of what their kids create?
@preibischs No, because their kids aren't property like an algorithm is.
@LouisIngenthron interesting point. I think the algorithm, yes, but key (or at least a major aspect) is training data, which was not owned by the algorithm creator but was publicly available data, each with its own license.
Assuming this to be a purely technical process, then the algorithm owner should not have the right to all the results of the data.
If it were a creative process, that would be different, at least that’s how we define intellectual property for humans.
Tough decisions ahead…
@preibischs Nah. All art is inspired by other art. Nothing is truly original. This is no different. So long as it's not directly copying, it's fine.
@preibischs Currently, copyright requires human authorship, so the AI can't own it. But it's also not clear you can claim ownership and put any license you want on it. I think no one can confidently answer this until courts rule on it.
@konrad_rokicki I guess it might boil down to the question whether outputs of “advanced AI’s” constitute a purely technical or creative process. If, at some point, we decide it’s creative then really tough decisions will arise … these questions already surface now for simple things like (trivial) code snippets (take it from #stackoverflow or an AI?) but it is likely just the beginning …
@preibischs openai terms of service.o US Copyright office makes it unclear if generated documents are public domain or if they are not copyrightable by the "AI" because the AI is a machine & that would be silly. If chatgpt accidentally quotes something, it is up to us to track down the license: https://openai.com/api/policies/service-terms/