> I mean the copyright has to belong to somebody right?
Why would it? It’s generated by blending together ~ every bit of content on the internet and in books that they could steal. Why would the operator of the blending machine suddenly get copyright?
Does a gambler own the copyright on the symbols generated by a slot machine?
There is the potential for a solid piece of artwork here, ie. at what point does a string of words become an artistic product.
Imagine a slot machine in a gallery that produces a 4 word sentence. Visitors press the button, and the artist copies the 4 words onto a piece of paper and puts it on the wall.
EDIT: my point being that causing a machine to generate words doesn’t give you copyright over the words but if you then do something with the words they become your work.
> I mean the copyright has to belong to somebody right?
Why would it? It’s generated by blending together ~ every bit of content on the internet and in books that they could steal. Why would the operator of the blending machine suddenly get copyright?
Does a gambler own the copyright on the symbols generated by a slot machine?
There is the potential for a solid piece of artwork here, ie. at what point does a string of words become an artistic product.
Imagine a slot machine in a gallery that produces a 4 word sentence. Visitors press the button, and the artist copies the 4 words onto a piece of paper and puts it on the wall.
EDIT: my point being that causing a machine to generate words doesn’t give you copyright over the words but if you then do something with the words they become your work.
The argument could probably be made that we currently don't recognize AI as a person and therefore no one created the work.
There does not have to be copyright. Nothing mandates that piece of data has one.