Post #1473870

Ah, this is Thaler v. Perlmutter. I seem to have picked up a reputation in these parts as being "pro-AI", so I'm not sure how my view will be interpreted, but Thaler is basically a loon. This case is not really over whether *AI art* can be copyrighted. It's about whether AI itself can *hold* copyright. ie, Thaler isn't arguing "I hold the copyright to this piece of art." He's arguing "*my AI* holds the copyright to this piece of art." Since AI is not a legal person - it's neither human nor a corporation - this is basically an open and shut case. There is no entity capable of holding copyright in this case. Since Thaler himself is explicitly disclaiming that *he* holds the copyright, that means the work in question has no copyright holder. Which puts it into the public domain. This specific piece in this specific circumstance, not *all* AI-generated pieces. It's a commonly misinterpreted case.