FlowVoid

The government didn't cave. They said from the beginning that they wouldn't intervene in this strike, and they didn't.

Aged like milk

Wouldn't matter. The Biden admin can move to dismiss without them. The motion is decided on the merits, which means it isn't stronger just because it has Mohela's signature on it.

The cases where copyright was denied involved prompt-driven generative AI. At some point the artist admitted that some of the creative decisions were made by the AI.

In your first example, you made all the creative decisions. The same is true of many filters, for example if I apply a "50s cinema filter" then I know exactly what it will do. The AI doesn't get to make any decisions.

On the other hand, if you tell the AI to "add some clouds to the image" and the algorithm decides where they go, then the sky it produces is not protected. Only the elements you controlled are.

You name your favorite country, and I'll tell you why they shouldn't flex either.

Because they oppose Iran. Same reason why we provided weapons to Iraq.

They said it's the closest in the region.

Which of its neighbors is more closely aligned with Western values?

It's all just saber rattling, when was the last time Netanyahu actually launched attacks on another -

<interrupted by ear piece>

Oh.

For tomorrow's headline, swap "Israel" and "Iran". Repeat ad infinitum.

In this case, it sounds like all the key creative choices (eg form, color, background) were made by the artist.

The basic legal test has to do with control over the output. A prompt is not control. If you tell Stable Diffusion "draw a dog playing chess" then you do not control the creative choices made in the image. Thus, they are not protected.

That's why Pollock paintings can be copyrighted: the key creative choices were controlled by Pollock. He wanted some blue streaks in one area and some red streaks in a different area.

To the extent that AI output can be controlled, it can be copyrighted. If you take a photo and tell an AI, "desaturate this photo" then there is only one possible outcome. The lack of color in the product was fully under your control. Likewise if you say, "Copy dog.gif from my Documents folder to the bottom left corner of the image".

On the other hand if you say, "Add a dog to the image", then not so much. Who determined what the dog would look like? Not you. So the dog is in the public domain.

And once in the public domain, it will likely remain there even if you iterate your prompts, like "Elongate the snout and widen the eyes". For the same reason that you generally cannot copyright an image of the Mona Lisa even with minor alterations.

Yes, he wanted a blue streak in the upper left. That doesn't mean he intended every last drop of blue paint exactly as it landed. He is nevertheless responsible for every drop of paint, because he controlled the paintbrush and he is the one who caused them to fall where they fell.

Likewise, a surgeon wants to cure a patient with a scalpel. He doesn't necessarily intend every complication that happens to the patient. He is nevertheless fully responsible, because he fully controlled the scalpel that caused those complications.