An artist who infamously duped an art contest with an AI image is suing the U.S. Copyright Office over its refusal to register the image’s copyright.

In the lawsuit, Jason M. Allen asks a Colorado federal court to reverse the Copyright Office’s decision on his artwork Theatre D’opera Spatialbecause it was an expression of his creativity.

Reuters says the Copyright Office refused to comment on the case while Allen in a statement complains that the office’s decision “put me in a terrible position, with no recourse against others who are blatantly and repeatedly stealing my work.”

  • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    If a skillless child can reproduce it with no training but a command of their language of origin, it’s not art.

    The art is in the eye, not the device. People made the same or similar claims about photography. “It’s just reproduction not creation!” “It’s just operating a machine that does all the work!”

    AI is a tool - the person is the creative.

    You may not like the art - but that’s not to say it’s not art. Either way I think it’s a creative work and worthy of at least the option to be considered art.

    • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      In my eye, AI isn’t art and using AI doesn’t make one an artist. In fact I think it’s an insult to at and artists that talentless hacks are now claiming the title when it takes a lifetime to develop a craft to become an artist.

      It’s shameful.

      • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        In my eye Jackson Pollock is a no-talent hack who created meaningless crap that looks like somebody left a 2yr old unsupervised in the arts and crafts room at school. And I think it’s an insult to other artists that his work is so heavily prized.

        But we’re talking about the quality of the work here aren’t we? Not whether it is a work at all. You’re effectively saying that you don’t value the work because it was easy. Which is fine - that’s your value call. But to deny that it’s a creative work at all is an entirely different thing.

        • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          And you’re allowed to think that with no argument from me. But do you see how many people have rushed to tell me how I’m wrong with their shit examples?

          AI isn’t art. It never will be. Using AI doesn’t make someone an artist. This is what I think. And it’s going to have to be okay.

          • Terrasque@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            AI can be art. And you’re like the people criticizing the first photographers saying what they did wasn’t art. This is what I think.

            And it’s going to have to be okay.

            • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              No, it’s not going to be okay being accused of something that I’m not. Photography IS art. AI is NOT art. So I’m not at all like the people saying it wasn’t.

              You’re free to disagree with me on what is or isn’t art, but don’t accuse me of being like anything until you know exactly what I’m actually like.

              Cool?