AI Series
AI-Generated Art & Copyright: General Ideas vs Particular Expressions
Copyright laws are designed to protect original creative works such as books, music, movies, art, and other forms of expression. The fundamental concept is that copyright protection extends to the specific expression of an idea rather than the underlying idea itself. This means that copyright laws grant exclusive rights to the creators of original works to control how their works are used, reproduced, distributed, performed, and displayed.
The distinction between the expression of an idea and the idea itself is key in copyright law. An idea is a general concept, a notion, or a thought, while the expression of an idea refers to the specific form in which the idea is presented. Copyright protects the concrete manifestation of an idea, which includes the way it is written, composed, filmed, or otherwise fixed in a tangible medium.
To better understand this concept, let’s consider an example. Suppose two authors independently come up with an idea for a novel about a young wizard attending a magical school. Both authors may have the same general idea, but copyright law does not protect the idea of a young wizard attending a magical school.
Instead, copyright protection would apply to the specific expression of that idea, such as the characters, plot, dialogue, setting, and other creative elements that make up the actual novel. This means that each author can create their own unique expression of the idea without infringing on the other’s copyright.
By focusing on the expression rather than the idea itself, copyright law seeks to strike a balance between encouraging creativity and innovation while also allowing for the free flow of ideas. This approach ensures that creators have the exclusive right to their original works, incentivizing them to produce new and original content. At the same time, it allows others to draw inspiration from existing ideas and create their own distinct expressions without running afoul of copyright law.
Copyright protection is automatic upon the creation of an original work fixed in a tangible medium. In most countries, including the United States, formal registration or the use of a copyright notice is not required for copyright protection. However, registering a copyright can provide additional benefits, such as the ability to enforce copyright in court and seek statutory damages.
When it comes to AI-generated art, the question of copyright can be complex and often raises unique challenges. AI systems, such as generative models, are trained on vast amounts of data, including existing works protected by copyright. These models can learn patterns, styles, and general ideas from the training set, which may influence the output they generate. However, due to the nature of AI-generated art, there are important considerations to be made regarding copyright infringement.
To understand this further, let’s break down the process:
AI models, such as generative adversarial networks (GANs) or recurrent neural networks (RNNs), are typically trained on large datasets that include various forms of copyrighted content, such as images, music, or texts. During the training process, the AI system learns statistical patterns and features present in the training data, including general ideas or styles.
When generating art, AI systems don’t directly copy or reproduce specific works from the training set. Instead, they learn to generate new content that reflects the general ideas, styles, or patterns observed during training. The AI system creates a new expression that is not an exact copy but may exhibit similarities or influences from the training data.
Copyright infringement occurs when there is a substantial similarity between the protected expression of an existing work and the AI-generated output. The concept of substantial similarity depends on various factors, such as the degree of similarity, the importance of the copied elements, and the potential market impact. If the AI-generated output closely resembles a copyrighted work, to the point where it can be considered an unauthorized reproduction or derivative work, it may infringe on copyright.
To mitigate copyright concerns, AI-generated art can incorporate transformative elements that distinguish it from the original works. Transformative use involves adding new creative elements, altering the style, combining multiple sources, or presenting the work in a new context. These transformations contribute to creating a new expression that goes beyond a mere reproduction or copy of existing works.
The legal aspects of AI-generated art and copyright infringement are still evolving, and different jurisdictions may have varying interpretations. Additionally, ethical considerations play a role in determining the impact on artists, original creators, and the overall cultural landscape. Striking a balance between fostering creativity, respecting copyright, and promoting innovation is an ongoing challenge.
To be sure, it is very easy to use generative AI systems to infringe on copyright, because of the nature of prompt writing. If you ask the system to produce a copyrighted entity directly, you will usually get it, as with this example below of ‘Darth Vader in chiaroscuro lighting.’
But if you extract the general concept of Darth Vader as “futuristic helmeted cyborg evil black armored warrior HDR digital dude in chiaroscuro lighting” you get something that you totally can’t be sued for:
If you want to push the envelope on what’s legally allowable (or you have higher risk tolerance for lawsuits!), you can tweak the prompt to “futuristic masked triangle helmeted cyborg evil black armored warrior HDR digital dude in chiaroscuro lighting with a hint of Darth Vader vibe.”
Copyrighting ‘Your’ AI Art
The US Copyright Office recently issued a statement of policy clarifying that AI-generated art cannot be copyrighted as it lacks the necessary human authorship for protection. This ruling means that only a work created by a human are eligible for copyright protection. However, the policy also allows for the possibility of copyrighting art containing elements of AI-generated content, provided that the original choices in the work were produced by a human mind. Applicants must now declare if AI was involved in the creation of their work during registration.
Copyright law is complex and context-specific, and legal advice should be sought for specific situations. The emergence of AI-generated art has sparked discussions around the need to adapt copyright laws to accommodate these new forms of creativity while still protecting the rights of original creators.
To summarize, AI-generated art can extract general ideas from a training set without infringing on the particular concrete expressions found in those works by transforming and reinterpreting the learned patterns to create new and distinct expressions. By incorporating transformative elements and avoiding substantial similarity, AI-generated art aims to navigate the boundaries of copyright law while fostering innovation and creativity in the realm of artificial intelligence.
Related Articles
AI & I (online ai art gallery)
Concept Craft: a Poetics of AI Art
Unveiling the Challenges: Generative AI and Nudity in Fine Art
Top 10 Tips for Writing Effective Prompts When Making AI Art
The Ten Most Influential Works of AI Art
Exploring AI-Generated Abstract Landscapes
The history and evolution of AI-generated art
AI and the Democratization of Art Creation: Revolutionizing the Creative Landscape
Creative Collaboration: How Artists and AI Can Work Together
Chicago Variations: AI Art & a poem, even
What DALL·E 2 Thinks My Games Course Looks Like
Text-to-Video AI-Generated Media
10 Historical Milestones in the Development of AI Systems
