“Sorry, AI, you might be smart, but you ain’t got that human touch!”
The age-old question of “what is art?” has taken a digital twist. Can creativity be coded? Does artificial intelligence have a place in the hallowed halls of copyright law? As machines flex their artistic muscles, the law responds with a resounding “Nice try, robot. Art requires a human touch.”
A recent ruling by a Washington federal judge, Beryl Howell, struck a blow to AI’s creative dreams. And no, it wasn’t because the AI’s artwork was deemed “too abstract” or “didn’t use enough color”. The verdict stated that art created by Artificial Intelligence can’t be copyrighted. Why? Because it lacks a critical ingredient – the sweet touch of human imagination.
Poor Stephen Thaler, an information scientist, learned this the hard way when he tried to register a two-dimensional piece of artwork, crafted by none other than “Creativity Machine”, the AI algorithm. Yep, that’s the name he went with. A bit on the nose, don’t you think?
This ruling wasn’t just a one-off, “Oops! I spilled coffee on my robe, let’s make a rash decision” type of situation. It was a landmark one, especially considering how AI-generated creations are sweeping the globe with their popularity. Products like ChatGPT or OpenAI are popping up like daisies in spring. And while they might not need water and sunshine to grow, they’re definitely seeking validation.
Judge Howell emphasized that previous courts have consistently declined to grant copyright to works sans human involvement. Oh, and if you’re thinking this is only about algorithms and codes, think again! Ever heard of the monkey who took a selfie? Yep, even he couldn’t claim copyrights. Tough world, huh?
The irony of it all is summed up by Howell’s observation: “We’re undoubtedly approaching new frontiers in copyright law, with artists now adding AI to their toolkit to produce visual or other forms of artworks.” The rise of AI is bound to prompt significant head-scratching. How much human touch is enough to warrant copyright? And how do you gauge the originality of art crafted by an AI that’s been “trained” on existing, copyrighted works?
In a world where machines are increasingly blurring the lines of creativity, the laws of the land seem to be sending a clear message: “It’s not enough to think like us; you gotta be one of us.”