A creator (Me) made a masterpiece with AI
The First Art Newspaper on the Net    Established in 1996 Saturday, November 2, 2024


A creator (Me) made a masterpiece with AI
Four images created by Midjourney when The New York Times columnist Farhad Manjoo directed the art generator to show him “a small green fellow who has trained Jedi for 800 years.” “A.I. probably shouldn’t be allowed to create direct copies of existing works,” writes Manjoo, “but it seems wise to allow it the same freedom to remix art that humans enjoy.” (via The New York Times)

by Farhad Manjoo



NEW YORK, NY.- I’ve got 99 problems with AI, but intellectual property ain’t one.

Media and entertainment industries have lately been consumed with questions about how content generated by artificial intelligence systems should be considered under intellectual property law. Last week, a federal judge ruled against an attempt to copyright art produced by a machine. In July, another federal judge suggested in a hearing that he would most likely dismiss a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by artists against several AI art generators. How AI might alter the economics of the movie and TV business has become one of the primary issues in the strike by writers and actors in Hollywood. And major news companies — including The New York Times — are weighing steps to guard the intellectual property that flows from their journalism.

In the face of all the possible actions against AI and its makers, I’d suggest caution. I’ve been thinking a lot about whether musicians, painters, photographers, writers, filmmakers and other producers of creative work — including, on good days, myself — should fear that machines might damage their livelihoods. After extensive research and consultation with experts, I’ve arrived at a carefully considered, nuanced position: meh.

Controversies over AI are going to put a lot of copyright lawyers’ kids through college. But the more I use ChatGPT, Midjourney and other AI tools, the more I suspect that many of the intellectual property questions they prompt will ultimately prove less significant than we sometimes assume. That’s because computers by themselves cannot yet and might never be able to produce truly groundbreaking creative work.

Indeed, I’d bet that artists and creative industries will ultimately find AI to be more a boon than a competitor. In a recent assessment of AI-produced comedy, Jason Zinoman, the Times’ comedy critic, suggested that AI comedians might ultimately improve human comedy: “Competition from increasingly clever computer programs will force artists to not only rely more on intuition than imitation, but also to think harder about what makes them, and their work, distinctly human.”

I think he’s right — not just about comedy but also about many other creative fields. What accounts for my sunny stance? History offers one clue: Technologies that made art easier to produce have rarely ended up stifling human creativity. Electronic synthesizers didn’t eliminate the need for people who play musical instruments. Auto-Tune didn’t make singing on pitch obsolete. Photography didn’t kill painting, and its digitization didn’t obviate the need for professional photographers.

Then there’s the content I’ve seen AI produce: Unless it’s been heavily worked over by humans, a lot of the music, images, jokes and stories that AI has given us so far have felt more like great mimicry than great art. Sure, it’s impressive that ChatGPT can write a pop song in the style of Taylor Swift. But the ditties still smack of soulless imitation. They’re not going to go platinum or sell out stadiums. AI might undermine some of the more high-volume corners of photography — stock photos, for instance — but will you use it to capture your wedding or to document a war? Nope.

Which is not to suggest there won’t still be a lot of legal wrangling. Mark Lemley, a professor at Stanford Law School who teaches and litigates on issues of intellectual property law, said that he thinks the next five to 10 years will be marked by a series of legal battles about the role AI plays in media. “The number of issues is going to expand and get more complicated,” he said.




Lemley is one of the lawyers representing the AI firm Stability AI in a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by artists. At the heart of that suit is the issue of how AI systems are trained. Most gain their smarts by analyzing enormous amounts of digital content, including lots of copyrighted work. Which prompts the question: Should the artists be compensated for their contributions, and if so, how?

To me, the answer is no. When a machine is trained to understand language and culture by poring over a lot of stuff online, it is acting — philosophically, at least — just like a human who draws inspiration from existing work. I don’t mind if human readers are informed or inspired by reading my work — that’s why I do it! — so why should I fret that computers will be?

Of course, one reason I might mind is if the machine uses what it learns from reading my work to produce work that could substitute for my own. But at the risk of hubris, I don’t think that’s likely in the foreseeable future. For me, a human creator’s very humanity feels like the ultimate trump card over the machines. Who cares about a computer’s opinion on anything?

Another question is how we should think about potential infringement by content produced by machines. Current copyright law is designed to protect specific creative works, not a general creative style. But if AI can copy an artist well enough to essentially duplicate the artist’s work, could that rise to the level of infringement? In a recent paper, Lemley and his co-authors suggested the following hypothetical: Someone sets up a site that creates “an auto-generated story about Yoda” every time a user visits. If the site charges users for the content, Lemley and colleagues argue, it could infringe Disney’s copyright — even if a human did not create the words and images about Yoda.

Such scenarios may not be hypothetical for long; AI generators are very good at creating nearly exact copies of many well-known characters. When I asked Midjourney to show me “a small green fellow who has trained Jedi for 800 years,” its output was pretty spot on.

Which raises a related issue: Can the prompts we give AI be protected by copyright law? There are already “prompt marketplaces” in which people sell the particular incantations they fed to AI to produce certain works. Can that really fly?

No doubt these questions are important, but it’s not hard to think of reasonable answers. AI probably shouldn’t be allowed to create direct copies of existing works, but it seems wise to allow it the same freedom to remix art that humans enjoy.

I wouldn’t allow the most common prompts to be copyrightable — you can’t claim any creativity in asking an AI to draw a cat — but prompts with some level of human inspiration should qualify as protectable work. After all, when I ask Midjourney to make “a cat smoking a pipe photographed on a Civil War battlefield,” I am engaged in at least a certain degree of creative work. The pipe-smoking Civil War cat was conjured by my own human brain. But are such simple strings of keywords — not much more than I would enter into a search engine — enough to qualify as copyrightable creations? At the moment, we don’t really know.

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.










Today's News

August 27, 2023

For some culture executives, a housing perk is rolled back

British Museum Director resigns after worker fired for theft

Bruce Davidson digs deep and finds gems he had overlooked

Condolences of the Museo Picasso Málaga on the death of Claude Ruiz-Picasso

In push to modernize Cairo, cultural gems and green spaces razed

Mickey Mantle still smashing records as his 1958 Yankee pinstripes sell for $4.68 million at Heritage

Heritage unlocks significant private collections for its Fine & Decorative Asian Art Signature Auction

36 hours in Palermo, Italy

Moran's first Comics and Pop Culture Memorabilia auction packs a punch

A golden age for Heritage as historic Batman and Robin, 'Star Wars' and 'X-Men' covers take a spin Sept, 14-17

In 1918, this banknote was worth $1,000. in September, it could sell for $250,000+ at Heritage Auctions

Woody Auction to auction The Sidlinger Collection September 23rd

Cube Art Fair, world's largest public art fair, returns to New York City with an innovative AI edition

Léa Garcia, who raised Black actors' profile in Brazil, dies at 90

David Jacobs, who turned soap opera into prime-time gold, dies at 84

A creator (Me) made a masterpiece with AI

After the fires, Native Hawaiians seek revival through ritual

Ishara Art Foundation presents 'Only Life, Myriad Places', a major solo exhibition of Sudarshan Shetty

University of South Florida Contemporary Art Museum hosting "Native America: In Translation"

'Posing Beauty in African American Culture' now open at Kent State University Museum

ICA/Boston presenting Tammy Nguyen's first solo museum exhibition in the United States

2022/2023 WAP Fellow Ato Ribeiro now on view at The Museum of Contemporary Art of Georgia

Australian contemporary artist Lynda Draper presents 'Drifting Moon' at Sullivan+Strumpf

Mark Linkous died in 2010. His final album is a family affair.

Water Damage Restoration Cost VS Emergency Plumbing Expenses




Museums, Exhibits, Artists, Milestones, Digital Art, Architecture, Photography,
Photographers, Special Photos, Special Reports, Featured Stories, Auctions, Art Fairs,
Anecdotes, Art Quiz, Education, Mythology, 3D Images, Last Week, .

 



Founder:
Ignacio Villarreal
(1941 - 2019)
Editor & Publisher: Jose Villarreal
Art Director: Juan José Sepúlveda Ramírez
Writer: Ofelia Zurbia Betancourt

Attorneys
Truck Accident Attorneys
Accident Attorneys
Holistic Dentist
Abogado de accidentes
สล็อต
สล็อตเว็บตรง

Royalville Communications, Inc
produces:

ignaciovillarreal.org juncodelavega.com facundocabral-elfinal.org
Founder's Site. Hommage
to a Mexican poet.
Hommage
       

The First Art Newspaper on the Net. The Best Versions Of Ave Maria Song Junco de la Vega Site Ignacio Villarreal Site Parroquia Natividad del Señor
Tell a Friend
Dear User, please complete the form below in order to recommend the Artdaily newsletter to someone you know.
Please complete all fields marked *.
Sending Mail
Sending Successful