That’s good news, in my opinion. If they’re allowed to just completely disregard copyright when training, then I should be able to completely disregard any attempted copyright on the output too.
Why does Thaler want to assign copyright to a non-human so badly, when he could simply take the credit himself?
We can see he made references to the fact that Corporations are considered people (fucking citizens united) in his arguments to the court.
Could someone perhaps use the result of the failed cases in an attempt to get citizens united overturned, based on any precedent set through Thaler’s appeals (assuming they all fail)? Maybe that’s too hopeful of a take?
Why does Thaler want to assign copyright to a non-human so badly, when he could simply take the credit himself?
Article tag line: “Stephen Thaler’s series of high-profile copyright cases has made headlines worldwide. He’s done it to demonstrate his AI is capable of independent thought.”
imo, 10 bucks says Thaler is doing this so he can sell his AI construct as “you can copyright DABUS’s output”.
