I would like to use the image I created for a book cover and sell it, would that be okay? Or would that be illegal?

  • Zarxrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    It may vary depending on your jurisdiction. Under US copyright law, I believe that generated images are not copyrightable, so you wouldn’t have any protections from anyone copying your cover, but I doubt that’s a big concern. The model or service that you use may also have various terms in their license that restrict what you are allowed to do with the generated images. Finally, you also need to make sure that your image isn’t violating someone else’s copyright. If you generate an image that is too similar to an existing image, that could be problematic.

    • Aurorabalias@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Okay, yes, I don’t care if someone uses the image afterwards, and I’m not trying to copy someone else’s work either…so the big if for me is…

      “is terms in their license that restrict what you are allowed to do with the generated images.”

      • brossman@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m not trying to copy someone else’s work either

        ah i have bad news for you on how all current ai generation systems work

        • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          I have bad news for you, that’s how humans work too. They get trained on how to draw/paint/etc. on copyrighted material, then make derivatives.

          • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Yes but ai doesn’t add anything new. The artists in our history we value are often valued because they challenged artistic conventions. An LLM literally cannot do this.

            The difference is that a human inputs their labor into their art, therefore adding value. When a machine takes hundreds of peoples labor and sells it without compensation it is exploitative but when I view hundreds of peoples labor, learn from it and add my own, I am participating in a valuable human tradition.

          • Nightwatch Admin@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Be that as it may, I’ve seen a lot of art and made some myself, but recreating a Sistine Chapel is not in within my reach for the foreseeable future.

            • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              It’s not like Michelangelo did it without significant training.

              “Among them was Domenico Ghirlandaio, a master in fresco painting, perspective, figure drawing and portraiture who had the largest workshop in Florence.[16] In 1488, at the age of 13, Michelangelo was apprenticed to Ghirlandaio.” -From Wikipedia

              He didn’t paint the chapel until 20 years later.