Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart
Mini Article – Volume 23, Issue 4
Share on Social
AI Stands for … Art Infringers?
By Alexander JSW Johnson
Artificial Intelligence tools have been all the rage in recent months. From ChatGPT to Midjourney, these tools take different forms but the premise is the same: a user enters a prompt in text form, and the AI tool creates a response in text-form or image. They do so by learning from existing writings and images and then composing a piece based on all those reference points. They can even write or render in the particular style of a person, genre, period, or other style-defining category.
Last month, a trio of artists filed a class action suit against three AI tool-makers: Stability AI Ltd. (and Stability AI), Inc., Midjourney, Inc., and DeviantArt, Inc. The thrust: these tools create works (text or images) taking the style of or sourcing from copyrighted works without permission.
I’m not here to weigh in on this suit (particularly the class certification angle), but, I do find it interesting and noteworthy that in my undergrad art studies, instructors often encouraged studying the classics and practicing replication of specific pieces down to every detail imaginable as a means of developing skill—but the works I trained on were always public domain pieces. The pieces that these AI tools have drawn on for training their skills and creating their pieces are, at least in some instances, not public domain.
This case draws out some interesting issues for AI-generated artwork. First, do these AI art bots “copy” works such that it is copyright infringement, or is it fair use as inspirational source material? Second, regardless of infringement and fair use, are the works of these AI tools copyrightable works themselves?
Last month I asked for your take on who owns the copyright in user-prompted, AI-generated text. After considering the issue for a different medium—visual works—I’m curious what your view is now.
Who owns the copyright in works generated by AI tools?
Published February 23, 2023
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
This practice is often called the “Poor Man’s Copyright” and the idea has been around for a long time. The theory is that mailing a copy of a work to yourself will provide you with certain legal rights akin to a copyright registration so long as the envelope remains sealed and bears a postmark by the United States Postal Service.
Public Domain Day is celebrated on January 1st and commemorates the expiration of copyright protection for certain creative works. US copyright law provides the copyright owner with certain exclusive rights for a limited time, after which the works fall into the public domain.
Unlike the Matrix, Star Wars, and Austin Powers, respectively, Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer, or ChatGPT, is not a robot in disguise or a bot of science fiction. We, the users, provide prompts in text form, and ChatGPT converses in response to the prompts.
Recently, we filed an application to register the copyright for Finny the Fish. In the United States, and in many other countries, copyright protection arises at the moment a work is fixed in tangible medium. So, why would we take the extra step to register Finny’s copyright?
With the 2022 midterms (almost) in the rearview mirror, political junkies are now free to turn their full attention to the 2024 presidential election. Today’s focus is on the tug of war that can occur when candidates play music at campaign events.
Both trademark law and copyright law may protect your logo, although the protection they provide differs. Trademark law would prohibit the unauthorized use of another’s logo that is sufficiently similar to your logo such that it is likely to cause confusion in the marketplace.
In the U.S., copyright protection generally does not extend to “useful” articles, like shoes, but can protect the designs on shoes, like that of the Yeezy Boost 350 sneakers. However, in Italy, the global fashion powerhouse since the 15th century, copyright law can protect shoes—like Moon Boots.
Under US copyright law, in most instances, if an independent designer creates your logo, then the independent designer, not you as the contracting party, would own the copyright.
Humans have been making and using musical instruments since at least the Paleolithic age—long before patent systems were put into place to protect inventions.
A trademark lawsuit brought by Vans against MSCHF, a Brooklyn-based art collective behind musician/artist Tyga’s “Wavy Baby” sneaker design.
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
