You should know first that the Ai procedure
'may' fall under this law
-transformative use
-fair use, as long as you post something online,
accept the term of service or TOS of the platform,
you 'consent' people to 'copy the style of your artwork'
technically and legally,(not speaking of ethic which elusive yet)
you own the 'art piece', not the 'art style'
no copyrights issue can protect 'your style'
for being 'copied'...or else we're all
will being sue from inspired by
others artists regardless of 'any degree of inspiration'.
As long as it's not 100% COPY or collage
or, even collage but if the subject of art
deviate from the art itself but focused on delivering some
the message then it's not copyright infringement.
like in the case of Jeff Koon and Richard Prince happened
in past.
-derivative use.
If the company lost the case of being sued for copyrights infringement,
then it's risky that we lose all the fair-use access
we may be lost all access to the public domain in the same principle.
we may be lost all access to Pinterest images or rights
to be inspired by other people's art or collage by
the same principle applied to humans.
Technically 'You should not
said to people don't copy my style
because it's against the way humans learning
and against yourself too,
how possibly you learn something,
if you're not copying something before?
and why it does not apply to AI.
Why ai copy is wrong?
because it's too good until damages your existence?
because it's take away, rip off your whole life exp.?
Well, I'd said that you can think in any way,
you have that right,
but technically you should not blame
the knife is wrong if it's used for murdered a person,
by against Ai, you are against the knife,
not a person who is actually a killer.
and people said No!! Ai is a 'steal'
it's unlike humans, for me
I look at the results.
Show the evidence of mid-journey
steal your or another artist's style.
and people said, no it's not inspiration.
It's stealing.
Yes you're right, it's not inspired
the machine cannot be inspired
it's changed art to mathematic equations,
copy by learning equation
like formulated your picture.
So it's the new way of creating art not
merely like you did.
It's a new way that it can formulaic your art
and reinterpretation,
why it's not copied?
because the answer lies in prompt engineering,
why Ai can make a picture according to your prompt
because it's synthesis and matches the word
with mathematic equation
It's the same thing humans did.
If it steals not copies,
then it's a great artist because
Picasso said good artists only copy
great artists steal.
and don't lie to me you 'never'
stealing someone or something on earth before.
No. Art does not work that way.
You can't create without seeing that before.
Or else it's not called 'visual art'
regardless of any level of 'inspiration'
so-called, theft has happened when it's a direct copy.
Ai does not store your image pixel or information,
it transforms art into a mathematical equation
and then recomposes like a conductor.
and if it's stealing, why it's not the same as humans and taken to the same standard? Ai art can't compare to tracing and direct copying or hard ref, very far from that.
because of the level of inspiration it did, then you should see this picture set I did
Dude, it's my face. If it can generate my face then it is 'synthesis' not 'copy' because technically it's prettier than my actual face but has my feature applicable, and the result is very far from the reference image I prompt Ai for generated my image.
or you just can't accept that.
Ai skillful than you now?
So you should stop competing for each other with skill
and start 'storytelling'
