alt Hacker NewsWhat if an artist programs a programs a carving robot to create a sculpture? How is that meaningfully different?
Based on your logic that should not qualify, but it currently clearly does: https://quayola.com/selected-unfinished-sculptures/
What if an artist programs a programs a carving robot to create a sculpture? How is that meaningfully different?
Based on your logic that should not qualify, but it currently clearly does: https://quayola.com/selected-unfinished-sculptures/
I think the copyright should go to the tool creator in that case, if the tool is acting as an extension of the creator.
But if the tool is created from collective human creation, the copyright should belong to all humanity, not the person who triggered the tool.
If you trained an LLM entirely on your own input, I think you should own the output, but that is not the case for any widely-used llm.