Photo Agencies Publish Open Letter Demanding AI Copyright Protection; petaPixel, August 10, 2023

 MATT GROWCOOT, PetaPixel; Photo Agencies Publish Open Letter Demanding AI Copyright Protection

"The world’s leading photo agencies and photographer associations have co-signed an open letter calling for legal protections against artificial intelligence (AI).

Getty Images, the Associated Press, Agence France-Press, the European Pressphoto Agency, and the National Press Photographers Association are among the organizations calling for intellectual property (IP) rights to be respected. 

While praising generative AI technology and its potential benefits to society, the signees warn that a flood of synthetic content into the public sphere has the potential to undermine the public’s trust in the media."

Copyright Report Says AI-Assisted Works Can Be Protected – But Only If A Human Was Still In Charge; Billboard, March 15, 2023

BILL DONAHUE, Billboard; Copyright Report Says AI-Assisted Works Can Be Protected – But Only If A Human Was Still In Charge

"A new policy report from the U.S. Copyright Office says that songs and other artistic works created with the assistance of artificial intelligence can sometimes be eligible for copyright registration, but only if the ultimate author remains a human being.

The report, released by the federal agency on Wednesday (March 15), comes amid growing interest in the future role that could be played in the creation of music by so-called generative AI tools — similar to the much-discussed ChatGPT...

Under the rules laid out in the report, the Copyright Office said that anyone submitting such works must disclose which elements were created by AI and which were created by a human. The agency said that any AI-inclusive work that was previously registered without such a disclosure must be updated — and that failure to do so could result in the cancellation of the copyright registration.

Though aimed at providing guidance, Wednesday’s report avoided hard-and-fast rules. It stressed that analyzing copyright protection for AI-assisted works would be “necessarily a case-by-case inquiry,” and that the final outcome would always depend on individual circumstances, including “how the AI tool operates” and “how it was used to create the final work.”

And the report didn’t even touch on a potentially thornier legal question: whether the creators of AI platforms infringe the copyrights of the vast number of earlier works that are used to “train” the platforms to spit out new works."

AI-created images lose U.S. copyrights in test for new technology; Reuters, February 22, 2023

Blake Brittain, Reuters; AI-created images lose U.S. copyrights in test for new technology

"Images in a graphic novel that were created using the artificial-intelligence system Midjourney should not have been granted copyright protection, the U.S. Copyright Office said in a letter seen by Reuters.

"Zarya of the Dawn" author Kris Kashtanova is entitled to a copyright for the parts of the book Kashtanova wrote and arranged, but not for the images produced by Midjourney, the office said in its letter, dated Tuesday."

Disney could lose the copyright to some very important characters; WKRC, January 1, 2022

WKRC; Disney could lose the copyright to some very important characters

"Disney is at risk of losing the copyright to some of its most important -- and lucrative -- characters."

Can You Change Two Words To A Song And Claim A New Copyright?; Above The Law, August 10, 2017

Krista L. Cox, Above The Law; 

Can You Change Two Words To A Song And Claim A New Copyright?

"In order to be copyrightable as a derivative work, the new work must “add new original copyrightable authorship.” We will (shall?) see whether these small changes were big enough to warrant copyright protection. And if a court indeed finds that it is, well, I guess that means it’s time for me to start marketing “Ringing Bells.”"

Should robot artists be given copyright protection?; Phys.org, June 26, 2017

Andres Guadamuz, Phys.org; Should robot artists be given copyright protection?

"But who owns creative works generated by artificial intelligence? This isn't just an academic question. AI is already being used to generate works in music, journalism and gaming, and these works could in theory be deemed free of copyright because they are not created by a human author.

This would mean they could be freely used and reused by anyone and that would be bad news for the companies selling them. Imagine you invest millions in a system that generates music for video games, only to find that music isn't protected by law and can be used without payment by anyone in the world."

In a Copyright Case, Justices Ponder the Meaning of Fashion; New York Times, 10/31/16

Adam Liptak, New York Times; In a Copyright Case, Justices Ponder the Meaning of Fashion:

"The case, Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands, No. 15-866, concerned stripes, zigzags and chevrons copyrighted by Varsity Brands, the leading seller of cheerleading uniforms. The company sued Star Athletica, a rival company, after it started to market uniforms with similar designs.

All concerned agree that two-dimensional designs may be copyrighted but that the cut and shape of three-dimensional garments may not. The question for the court was the legal significance of fusing Varsity’s designs with cheerleading outfits."

Appeals Court Rules 'Point Break' Parody Is Entitled to Copyright Protection; Hollywood Reporter, 10/30/15

Eriq Gardner, Hollywood Reporter; Appeals Court Rules 'Point Break' Parody Is Entitled to Copyright Protection:

"On Friday, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals took up a dispute that is a bit of a mind-bender and delivered an opinion that determines that a parody is entitled to copyright protection.

The dispute concerns playwright Jamie Keeling's theatrical adaptation of the 1991 film Point Break, which starred Keanu Reeves as a federal agent who goes undercover as a surfer. In the film, Reeves is unintentionally hysterical, so Keeling got the bright idea to have an audience member chosen at random to recite his lines.

The production company behind the live version stopped paying Keeling, did its own version, and took the position that that Keeling had no right to her script since it was based on the film. This set up the fascinating question of whether someone who creates a parody of copyrighted material could sue someone else who also is doing a parody.

In December 2012, after a judge said absolutely, a jury returned a $250,000 verdict in favor of Keeling. What followed was the appeal where 2nd Circuit judge Jose Cabranes decides that even an unauthorized work that makes fair use of source material is protected."

Wal-Mart's DRM Nightmare Just Won't End - Wired.com, 10/10/08

Wal-Mart's DRM Nightmare Just Won't End:

"Wal-Mart has decided to keep the music that it sold wrapped in a layer of copyright protection playable, following a flurry of customer complaints about legally purchased music becoming unplayable...

An e-mail sent to Wal-Mart digital music store customers said the company will continue to support the DRM-ed song files sold on walmart.com starting in 2003. The e-mail reversed last month's announcement that Wal-Mart would shut down the servers that authenticate the copyright protected music it no longer sells. Unfortunately, doing so would render all protected music purchased from the store in the past five years unplayable."
http://blog.wired.com/music/2008/10/wal-mart-will-c.html