The US Copyright Office offers creative workers a powerful labor protective.

  • FaceDeer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    He claimed the AI was the author of the work and tried to use the work for hire clause to claim the copyright himself because he owned the machine that created it.

    That’s two separate steps. First claiming the AI holds the copyright as the author, then that it’s assigned to him because he “hired” the AI. The court said the AI can’t hold the copyright, so step one fails. Step two never comes into play as a result. Since Thaler specifically said that he wasn’t the author, that left the court with no choice but to shrug and say “guess that means there is no author, and therefore no one holds copyright.”

    If Thaler had said “I am the author of the work and I used the AI as my tool to create it” that would have been an entirely different matter.

    As far as I know that photographer tried to do the same thing here

    There was no actual photographer, or if there was it’s a coincidence - I made that up as an analogy.