I stumbled upon the following link today.
https://authorsguild.org/human-authored
Are people going to care “…in an increasingly AI-saturated market” that books are still being written by humans without AI assistance?
I’m curious how copyright law is going to change in the coming years. For companies that use AI to write software, I’m pretty sure they’re going to want to “own” the AI-generated code and to use it as a strategic advantage. If a company can get rid of most of their software developers and still make a profit, why wouldn’t they?
If a book is mostly written by AI, should an author be able to copyright it? Should an “AI prompter” get paid as much as an author who chooses not to use AI? And what’s going to change when prompters are no longer needed. I can easily imagine AI generating its own prompts based on what output tends to do best in the market.
I suspect that we’re going to see more litigation along these lines in the years to come.
As of now, there are only a few legal precedents related to AI cases. This article ends with the following statement. “One thing is for sure, AI is moving faster than ever, and sooner or later, all courts will have to grapple with the foundational elements of how AI is treated differently from humans and how it impacts existing laws.”
We live in interesting times.
Leave a Reply