In addition to Weibo, there is also WeChat
Please pay attention
WeChat public account
Shulou
2025-01-29 Update From: SLTechnology News&Howtos shulou NAV: SLTechnology News&Howtos > IT Information >
Share
Shulou(Shulou.com)11/24 Report--
Thank CTOnews.com netizens Rimi Ishihara for the delivery of the clue to happiness! On the evening of August 22, Beijing time, a US court in Washington ruled that works created by pure AI are not protected by US law, and works produced by AI and human authors can be copyrighted.
Stephen Thaler, a US computer scientist, believed that his AI system, DABUS, could create works of art and that the system should own the copyright to works of art, but US District Judge Beryl Howell Howell rejected the request.
The image source PixabayDABUS is an abbreviation for "unified awareness autopilot device" (device for the autonomous bootstrapping of unified sentience). Taylor has applied for patents for DABUS in Britain, South Africa, Australia and Saudi Arabia, but with little success.
Ryan Abbott, Taylor's attorney, said he and his client disagreed with the court's decision and would appeal. The US copyright Office said in a statement that it believed the court's ruling was correct.
With the development of generative AI technology, copyright has become the focus of public attention. An artist has previously asked for the copyright of AI images, which are generated by the Midjourney system, and the artist acknowledges that Midjourney is only part of the creative process. The United States copyright Office does not agree with the artist and refuses to acknowledge that the copyright belongs to the creator.
Howell believes that when artists put AI in their toolbox, copyright issues touch on new areas, which brings new challenges to copyright law. Howell also stressed: "nevertheless, this case is not complicated."
In 2018, Taylor applied for the copyright of a visual art called "A Recent Entrance to Paradise". He said the art was created by AI and had no "manual input." Last year, the US copyright Office rejected Taylor's request that creative works must have human authors if they are to be copyrighted.
Taylor believes that the law does not explicitly require works to have human authors, and that the reason why the United States Constitution advocates copyright protection is to promote the progress of science and practical art, and the concept of AI copyright is in line with this purpose. Howell agrees with the United States copyright Office that, according to centuries of established understanding, copyright requires human authors, and this is a basic requirement.
Welcome to subscribe "Shulou Technology Information " to get latest news, interesting things and hot topics in the IT industry, and controls the hottest and latest Internet news, technology news and IT industry trends.
Views: 0
*The comments in the above article only represent the author's personal views and do not represent the views and positions of this website. If you have more insights, please feel free to contribute and share.
Continue with the installation of the previous hadoop.First, install zookooper1. Decompress zookoope
"Every 5-10 years, there's a rare product, a really special, very unusual product that's the most un
© 2024 shulou.com SLNews company. All rights reserved.