article thumbnail

[Guest post] Artificial Intelligence and (hopefully) the death of copyright

The IPKat

In my opinion, there has never been any talk of such works, because that would be the same as talking about non-distinctive trademarks. 340 (1991) , Case C-5/08, Infopaq (2009) , Eastern Book v. So, there is no literal and non-literal copying of a work. Rural, 499 U.S. Modak (2008) 1 SCC 1 ). This is pure fiction.

Copyright 138
article thumbnail

What Goldsmith Means to AI Trainers

IP Intelligence

2009); Authors Guild v. Challenges for Content Owners in AI Training No content owner will ever be able to demonstrate that it was their work, and their work alone, that enabled a usable AI model. Second, the number of copies/downloads/users/seat licenses model simply does not work in the AI training context.

Fair Use 106
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

How to Avoid Pitfalls on the Way to Decentralized Disney

Copyright Lately

The first thing that’s important to understand is that buying a copy of a creative work, even if it happens to the only copy in existence, doesn’t give you any copyright interest in the work. So, if you buy a copy of “Dune,” you can read it. Want to Create New Derivative Works?

article thumbnail

What Goldsmith Means to AI Trainers

LexBlog IP

2009); Authors Guild v. Challenges for Content Owners in AI Training No content owner will ever be able to demonstrate that it was their work, and their work alone, that enabled a usable AI model. Second, the number of copies/downloads/users/seat licenses model simply does not work in the AI training context.

article thumbnail

What Goldsmith Means to AI Trainers

IP Intelligence

2009); Authors Guild v. Challenges for Content Owners in AI Training No content owner will ever be able to demonstrate that it was their work, and their work alone, that enabled a usable AI model. Second, the number of copies/downloads/users/seat licenses model simply does not work in the AI training context.

article thumbnail

The FTC’s Misguided Comments on Copyright Office Generative AI Questions

Patently-O

so-called “non-expressive” use in which copying is undertaken not to distribute the copied material directly or indirectly but rather for some other purpose. The FTC Comments do not explicitly refer to or analyze the substantial body of court decisions holding that a range of non-expressive uses of copyrighted works are fair uses.

article thumbnail

Evolution of Tests of Creativity in Copyrights

IP and Legal Filings

Originality is the quality that distinguishes produced or invented works from copies, clones, forgeries, or derivative works by being new or novel. The papers were taken from copies of the examination papers that students provided, not from publications by the University of London Press Ltd. 1] [1916] 2 Ch 601. [2]