I think the confutation lays in the understanding of the lawsuit, this subject matter is about.
In that lawsuit the person tried claiming the AI as the author, which the courts said that the AI is a tool and therefor can't claim authorship or copyright.
Many people think (thanks to YouTubers like Top Music Attorney) that means anything produced by AI, the human can't claim authorship or have a copyrights. This is faults.
Authorship and copyright are a claim to ownership, which means AI can't claim ownership of the output, but the human that prompted the AI, regardless of how little or how much effort they put into the prompt, they have ownership of that output.
I understand you were talking more on the ethical/moral side of this topic. But I don't think it really matters to the majority of the consumers out there. Think about all the place of origin labels that are required for most products, that's been around for 4 decades now. They haven't changed consumers buying habits at all.
This is because people buy things based of 1st needs and wants, 2nd price, 3rd quality, 4th availability. Rather it was stamped out in a manufacturing plant or hand crafted doesn't matter. I think with AI it's no different.
I’m always neutral when writing about this, even though I am passionate about music. I don’t think or initiate talk about morals and ethics in technology because the human mind can corrupt and pervert a basic toothbrush if it is so inclined. I am, however, addressing some of the the most often heard concerns and criticisms. Not to convince anyone of anything, but to present a balanced and unbiased perspective from an experienced musician/producer.
I hear what you're saying. Thing is( I find it with most things I write about), It's not your writing that's not neutral, it's the topic that's not neutral.
Even when your just writing about the most concerns or criticisms given about any topic. The topic tends to force you out of neutrality and on to one side or the other.
Specially when the topic has moral, ethical, political, economical, aspects to it.
That isn't a shortcoming of a writer, it's just the nature of the beast that I've came to realize over the last 6 months of doing this.
Other than Beyond the Pharm, I can't think of any topics that I write about on which I'm neutral. Even my fiction is distinctly and deliberately misanthropic.
I think the confutation lays in the understanding of the lawsuit, this subject matter is about.
In that lawsuit the person tried claiming the AI as the author, which the courts said that the AI is a tool and therefor can't claim authorship or copyright.
Many people think (thanks to YouTubers like Top Music Attorney) that means anything produced by AI, the human can't claim authorship or have a copyrights. This is faults.
Authorship and copyright are a claim to ownership, which means AI can't claim ownership of the output, but the human that prompted the AI, regardless of how little or how much effort they put into the prompt, they have ownership of that output.
I understand you were talking more on the ethical/moral side of this topic. But I don't think it really matters to the majority of the consumers out there. Think about all the place of origin labels that are required for most products, that's been around for 4 decades now. They haven't changed consumers buying habits at all.
This is because people buy things based of 1st needs and wants, 2nd price, 3rd quality, 4th availability. Rather it was stamped out in a manufacturing plant or hand crafted doesn't matter. I think with AI it's no different.
I’m always neutral when writing about this, even though I am passionate about music. I don’t think or initiate talk about morals and ethics in technology because the human mind can corrupt and pervert a basic toothbrush if it is so inclined. I am, however, addressing some of the the most often heard concerns and criticisms. Not to convince anyone of anything, but to present a balanced and unbiased perspective from an experienced musician/producer.
I hear what you're saying. Thing is( I find it with most things I write about), It's not your writing that's not neutral, it's the topic that's not neutral.
Even when your just writing about the most concerns or criticisms given about any topic. The topic tends to force you out of neutrality and on to one side or the other.
Specially when the topic has moral, ethical, political, economical, aspects to it.
That isn't a shortcoming of a writer, it's just the nature of the beast that I've came to realize over the last 6 months of doing this.
Other than Beyond the Pharm, I can't think of any topics that I write about on which I'm neutral. Even my fiction is distinctly and deliberately misanthropic.