IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New So should the copyright to the result belong to...
...that seed, or should your copyright be to that seed itself in stead of the final output?

Being that the random seed is a number — a rather long integer, I guess? — and numbers aren't per se able to either be copyrighted or own a copyright... Idunno, but I kinda can't see how that makes the argument for "AI" output being copyrightable all that much stronger.
--

   Christian R. Conrad
The Man Who Apparently Still Knows Fucking Everything


Mail: Same username as at the top left of this post, at iki.fi
New Hence "quibble" instead of "substantive argument" ;-)
Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
New 👍🏻
     Well, so much for my plan to make a fortune out of these things - (rcareaga) - (26)
         Of course I have an opinion - (drook) - (3)
             I wonder how this applies to code generators? - (crazy) - (2)
                 Or compilers - (drook)
                 In my line of argumentation, that's cut and dry: - (CRConrad)
         workaround include that AI in a corporation and have the corporation copyright the material -NT - (boxley)
         I'm with the CO and its teeming myriads. - (CRConrad) - (15)
             Quibble - (malraux) - (3)
                 So should the copyright to the result belong to... - (CRConrad) - (2)
                     Hence "quibble" instead of "substantive argument" ;-) -NT - (malraux) - (1)
                         👍🏻 -NT - (CRConrad)
             What about landscape photos? - (drook) - (6)
                 rofl sounds like a familiar argument -NT - (boxley) - (5)
                     It sounds silly now, but painters used to say exactly that -NT - (drook) - (4)
                         you wern't saying that a number of years ago -NT - (boxley) - (3)
                             Which "that" was I not saying? -NT - (drook) - (2)
                                 Re: Which "that" was I not saying? - (boxley) - (1)
                                     First difference I can think of is IP vs physical - (drook)
             Jackson sucking on that - (rcareaga) - (3)
                 "This"? - (CRConrad) - (2)
                     Hmm, now that you've prompted me to think more about it ... - (drook) - (1)
                         Depends on how you count coup on the trump. - (CRConrad)
         For the defense - (rcareaga) - (3)
             The thing about "in the style of ..." - (drook) - (2)
                 I have a Greg cherry hologram - (crazy) - (1)
                     But if someone *could* reproduce it ... - (drook)
         I think you're Ok, if this story is correct. - (Another Scott)

Build a bridge out of 'er!
165 ms