Tweet
Content generated by artificial intelligence - including AI writers like ChatGPT and image-generating tools like DALL-E 2 - can now be copyrighted if they meet certain criteria, according to the US Copyright Office.
Until now, the Copyright Office has only considered human-generated work for copyright applications, however, in a shocking turn of events it will now consider AI-generated content so long as a significant proportion of the work was also carried out by a human.
In a Statement of policy published earlier this month, the Officeâs Director Shira Perlmutter wrote: âIn the case of works containing AI-generated material, the Office will consider whether the AI contributions are the result of âmechanical reproductionâ or instead of an authorâs âown original mental conception, to which [the author] gave visible form.ââ
[HEADING=1]Copyrighted AI material[/HEADING]
Perlmutter describes that the analysis would be on a âcase-by-caseâ basis in order to assess whether the human is the true author of the content.
An example of a denied application would involve an AI writer receiving a prompt and generating new âcomplex written, visual, or musicalâ content. On the other hand, âsufficient human authorshipâ could result in the acceptance of a copyright application. This could involve the creative arrangement of AI-generated content or further editing whereby AI content is considered merely a template for further work.
Read more
The truth of the matter is that the world continues to battle logistically, legally, and ethically with AI as interest in the technology continues to surge, and itâs likely that processes like copyrighting will be continually monitored as further developments take place.
In order to help distinguish AI from human-generated content, there have been discussions of watermarking work created by machines, but so far that has proven troublesome.
[ul]
[li]Check out the best free writing apps to create your content today[/li][/ul]
Continue readingâŚ
Until now, the Copyright Office has only considered human-generated work for copyright applications, however, in a shocking turn of events it will now consider AI-generated content so long as a significant proportion of the work was also carried out by a human.
In a Statement of policy published earlier this month, the Officeâs Director Shira Perlmutter wrote: âIn the case of works containing AI-generated material, the Office will consider whether the AI contributions are the result of âmechanical reproductionâ or instead of an authorâs âown original mental conception, to which [the author] gave visible form.ââ
[HEADING=1]Copyrighted AI material[/HEADING]
Perlmutter describes that the analysis would be on a âcase-by-caseâ basis in order to assess whether the human is the true author of the content.
An example of a denied application would involve an AI writer receiving a prompt and generating new âcomplex written, visual, or musicalâ content. On the other hand, âsufficient human authorshipâ could result in the acceptance of a copyright application. This could involve the creative arrangement of AI-generated content or further editing whereby AI content is considered merely a template for further work.
Read more
The best laptops for writers
ChatGPT-like chatbots to fall into scope of UK law
5 ways that ChatGPT could transform Microsoft Office
In order to help distinguish AI from human-generated content, there have been discussions of watermarking work created by machines, but so far that has proven troublesome.
[ul]
[li]Check out the best free writing apps to create your content today[/li][/ul]
Continue readingâŚ