Hacker News Reader

Comment by MrVandemar | Hacker News Reader

> 1. Midjourney v6 is absolutely fantastic for creating editorial images and brand images.

And I believe they're all currently uncopyrightable.

I'm unsure if that means they're automatically public-domain, but I guess if you see something you like that someone else has generated, you can use it yourself!

View on HN

The moment your touch a pixel of that image with Photoshop you should be able to copyright it, right?

Théâtre D'opéra Spatial was highly modified in Photoshop, didn't help that case.

Any 'de minimis' changes will probably lead to rejection.

That might be a slightly over-simplistic explanation.

"The Copyright Office agreed that the parts of the painting that Allen had altered with Adobe constituted original work. However, it maintained that other parts generated by AI could not be copyrighted. In other words: Allen could copyright parts of the painting, but not the whole thing."

https://www.wired.com/story/ai-art-copyright-matthew-allen/

For now, it seems the issue is still being disputed

This seems like such a dumb approach to maintain a completely broken system!

Not a lawyer, suspect you either need to make significant creative transformations, or generate something that's trademark protected.

Nope.

Why do you conclude that? It was a human that wrote the prompt that generated the particular image, and a human that selected the image out of several candidates, and iteratively adjusted the prompt to get a desired output, as well as selected the particular model/tool to use. Why would the output of this process not be copyrightable? And what makes it materially different from setting up a plugin in an audio software, input a few MIDI notes and set a few synth parameters. I am pretty sure the audio output from that process is copyrightable/copyrighted?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com