The US Copyright Office offers creative workers a powerful labor protective.

    • @Then_I_said@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1910 months ago

      Ii-V-I is already not eligible for copyright. That’s why a million contrafacts exist.

      Lyrics, maybe. Lyrics are really the most copyrightable part of a song. Then melody after that.

      Chord progressions are barely protectable, usually only in combination with a melody and lyrics.

    • @nous@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1810 months ago

      The title of this article is a lie. The case it talks about is only judging the case where someone used an AI they created to generate an image, without human input then tried to claim the AI as the author and himself as the copyright holder on the work for hire clause/being the owner of the AI.

      The conclusion was basically that a work need some human creative input to be able to copyrightable. It does not answer the question of how much work is required when AI is involved (and explicitly calls this out).

      So using AI as part of creating a work does not mean it is uncopyrightable. Only the case where you have put in no input into that work.

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1010 months ago

      What if an AI is doing my mastering in my DAW?

      Then it’s probably an improvement over today’s mastering engineers.