After revisiting the copyright of the graphic novel Zarya of the Dawn, the U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) has decided that AI-generated images are not protectable under current copyright law, as they “are not the product of human authorship”.
The USCO has asserted that copyright protection was originally granted to the book’s author Kris Kashtanova in error as that original copyright included all of the images in the book which were generated using Midjourney, though she can copyright the parts of the book that she wrote and how the AI-generated images are arranged on the page.
The USCO points to its Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices which states that copyrights will be refused for any work not created by humans, including AI-generated content such as stories, screenplays, and articles pieced together by AI programs like ChatGPT.
“The process by which a Midjourney user obtains an ultimate satisfactory image through the tool is not the same as that of a human artist, writer, or photographer… the initial prompt by a user generates four different images based on Midjourney’s training data. While additional prompts applied to one of these initial images can influence the subsequent images, the process is not controlled by the user because it is not possible to predict what Midjourney will create ahead of time.”
USCO
The USCO argues that, unlike a photographer, Midjourney users have very limited control of the final images. Kris Kashtanova maintains that the images generated by Midjourney are a “direct expression of my creativity and therefore copyrightable”. In future it would seem like we’re going to need a clearer definition of what constitutes “the product of human authorship”.
It’s anybody’s guess as to where this is going long-term. Midjourney general counsel Max Sills says the USCO’s decision is “a great victory for Kris, Midjourney, and artists [as it is] clearly saying that if an artist exerts creative control over an image generating tool like Midjourney… the output is protectable”.
Many artists argue that the algorithm does its bidding and that they come up with the inspiration, ideas and text prompts to create the images, so why the fuss, it’s just a another tool. Other human artists will be happy because the integrity and value of their work is preserved. Other, similar ongoing legal battles will will help to clarify the position of all sides of the argument in due course.
If you are looking for advice, guidance and support on the use of generative AI in your creative processes and would like to safely make use of the exciting new art forms it can create, we are here to help. Feel free to get in touch – contact@mondatum.com.
Source: Cartoon Brew