nostr:npub1t2dd8cesvwethk0ekqa4njm0x035wunzwftlvkq6j7adc72372vs3n5a5f misleading headline. That's not really what the judge said. The judge states that art made with NO human involvement can't be copyrighted, mainly due to the plaintiff attempting to list his AI "creativity machine" as the sole author.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.