I’ve generally been against giving AI works copyright, but this article presented what I felt were compelling arguments for why I might be wrong. What do you think?

    • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If he had deliberately caused the monkey to take that photo, he might have owned the copyright.

      If you pay a photographer to take photos at your wedding, you own the copyright for those photos - not the photographer.

        • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Generally, photographers do not like to offer their services to clients through a Work for Hire Agreement

          If I was getting married, I’d find one that will do a work for hire agreement. It’s my wedding, I want to own the photos. Nobody else should be profiting off them (aside from what I paid them to take the photos).

      • Wiz@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you deal with the photographer that you own the images from the wedding and that’s in the contract, yeah. Otherwise, traditional copyright law would apply, and the photographer gets the rights.