She introduces an "economic nexus test" for cases where the transformative nature of AI-generated works is ambiguous, focusing on the economic impact on the original artists
This is genuinely horrifying. She wrote an entire paper on a tinman premise? That “AI” has “rights”? That prompting in any way, shape or form resembles image creation?
This is genuinely horrifying. She wrote an entire paper on a tinman premise? That “AI” has “rights”? That prompting in any way, shape or form resembles image creation?
Have to look into this one
Did you notice how ChatGPT interpreted "Content Creators" as AI makers in this context? That was by no means my intention 😊
Jesus! I spit my morning coffee over a hallucination?