The US Copyright Office offers creative workers a powerful labor protective.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    20
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    This is going to get dicey.

    If I ask ChatGPT for a chord progression, and it says “Use the ii V I resolution in C”

    And I now play ||: Dm Dm G7 C :||

    Then I sing some heartfelt lyrics and add a drum beat and a bass line…

    Did an AI write the song?

    Well what if I asked it for the lyrics?

    Lyrics but not the chords?

    What if an AI is doing my mastering in my DAW?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1810 months ago

      Ii-V-I is already not eligible for copyright. That’s why a million contrafacts exist.

      Lyrics, maybe. Lyrics are really the most copyrightable part of a song. Then melody after that.

      Chord progressions are barely protectable, usually only in combination with a melody and lyrics.

    • @nous
      link
      English
      1610 months ago

      The title of this article is a lie. The case it talks about is only judging the case where someone used an AI they created to generate an image, without human input then tried to claim the AI as the author and himself as the copyright holder on the work for hire clause/being the owner of the AI.

      The conclusion was basically that a work need some human creative input to be able to copyrightable. It does not answer the question of how much work is required when AI is involved (and explicitly calls this out).

      So using AI as part of creating a work does not mean it is uncopyrightable. Only the case where you have put in no input into that work.

    • Flying Squid
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      910 months ago

      What if an AI is doing my mastering in my DAW?

      Then it’s probably an improvement over today’s mastering engineers.