Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

wavefxn22 t1_j69828s wrote

Reply to comment by visarga in Google not releasing MusicLM by Sieventer

They aren’t necessarily broad categories. You can ask ai to do something in the style of a specific artist. Say, van gough. His style was not a broad category, it was very distinct. And even he had styles within his styles, different periods.

Ai can be broad or specific, when it gets too specific as in people asking for “in the style of van gough” then we need some copyright protections.

Picked van gough as an example because he killed himself thinking he was worthless. He’d be even worse off today

1

visarga t1_j6c2z5z wrote

I disagree, copyrighting styles is absurd, countless possibilities banned in one go? We'll get to the point where humans fear creating anything because it will inevitably resemble some style somewhere.

2

wavefxn22 t1_j6d8crl wrote

I don’t think you understand what I said; there’s a range. A work in the style of Van Gogh, is a limited style range that should have copyright protections. A work in the style of Impressionism however is fair use.

1

visarga t1_j6n30bh wrote

I don't think even Van Gogh can claim ownership of squiggly lines that look like fire or the colour palette of white-blue-gold. They pre-existed and were rediscovered in many ways in by many artists.

Can we agree that a style used by 3 or more artists doesn't belong to anyone and is open for AI to use? We just need to make a list of all styles that are generic enough.

0