Plaintiff Stephen Thaler had appealed after lower courts upheld a U.S. Copyright Office decision that the AI-crafted visual ⁠art ‌was ineligible for copyright.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/43846600

This is massive news. Means companies can’t create defensible IP from any AI-generated work.

Interesting to know how far this extends to… movies, code?

  • atrielienz@lemmy.worldEnglish
    5·
    4 天前

    “US Supreme Court declines to hear arguments of whether or not AI can hold copyright on its outputs” is a better/more factual headline.

  • cenotaph@piefed.zipEnglish
    3·
    4 天前

    Not necessarily, just means they don’t think this particular case has the strength to decide precedent the way they want. There is nothing that stops some corpo from bringing a different case should you use their material.

    Although it does mean the lower court case stands for now, so to a degree you are correct