Quick Post On AI Writing and Copyright…

Got Three Letters…

All three explained to me (I did not take then as condescending, but they were…) that I did not understand how the copyright office is having issues on how much human touch needs to be done to make a piece of AI art or writing able to be protected by copyright and thus owned as a property.

Basic rule of copyright… It must be human created.

Is a 10% change enough of an AI output? No. How about an 80% change? Is that enough to have it deemed human created? (We won’t talk about the minimum requirement of originality because that is just mostly moot.) So yes, the copyright offices here and in other major countries are trying to work that ball of ugly out, and it will take more decades in court than I care to think about. Way past my lifetime I am sure.

And even then it will be subjective.

Yup, I study copyright and read copyright office decisions and court cases and so on because I am a copyright junkie (and I make my living with copyright and trademark… duh.)

But as I said yesterday, THAT IS NOT THE PROBLEM….

The discussions and court cases and decisions by the copyright office assume the underlying AI output if valid. Not stolen.

But alas, in fiction writing and graphic arts, just about 100% of any AI program for fiction and maybe up to 80% of all art AI programs use stolen copyright. So mostly at this point, if you are so lazy as to use AI art or a writing program for your fiction, you are using stolen property.

You will not own it. It was not yours to start with. Called theft and you have no right to the copyright of something you have stolen.

So, the bottom line is that no matter how much lipstick you smear on stolen property to try to pretend it is yours, it is still stolen property.