Monday, December 12, 2022

ChatGPT experiments

Prompted by recent reporting and inspired in particular by Ian Bogost's piece, I fed ChatGPT some of the questions I ask my students, and I am not worried about it helping anyone pass a law school class at this point, though perhaps that will change. It's good at surfacing related, relevant concepts that you didn't mention, but that's about it.

Q: If the derivative works right were abolished, would anything important be lost? In your analysis, consider the role of substantial similarity.

ChatGPT, getting everything backwards:

If the derivative works right were abolished, it would have significant implications for the creative industries. The derivative works right is a legal concept that allows creators to build upon existing works in order to create new, original works. This right is important because it allows creators to build upon the ideas and creations of others, and it encourages creativity and innovation.

One of the main ways that the derivative works right is used is to create adaptations of existing works. For example, a movie studio might create a film adaptation of a novel, or a video game developer might create a game based on a popular TV show. Without the derivative works right, creators would not be able to create these adaptations without permission from the original creators.

Another important aspect of the derivative works right is that it helps to protect creators from accusations of copyright infringement. In order to determine if a work is infringing on another's copyright, courts often look at whether the new work is substantially similar to the original work. If the derivative works right were abolished, it would be much harder to determine if a new work was infringing on an existing one, and this could lead to confusion and legal uncertainty.

In conclusion, the derivative works right plays an important role in promoting creativity and innovation, and protecting creators from accusations of copyright infringement. Abolishing this right would have significant negative implications for the creative industries.

No comments: