Navigating the Copyright Conundrum in AI-Generated Art

In a rapidly evolving landscape where AI programs like ChatGPT, Midjourney, and Stable Diffusion are rewriting the rules of creative expression, a pressing question looms: Who truly owns AI-generated art? This issue came to the forefront when artist Kris Kashtanova stirred controversy by using an AI program, Midjourney, to craft a graphic novel. The ensuing debate has implications for artists, copyright law, and the burgeoning AI industry.

The Birth of "Zarya of the Dawn"

Kashtanova's journey began when they fed instructions into Midjourney, a ChatGPT-like AI, prompting it to create a graphic novel. "Zendaya leaving gates of Central Park," Kashtanova typed, setting the stage for a futuristic narrative. What emerged was an 18-page graphic story, "Zarya of the Dawn," featuring a character reminiscent of actress Zendaya traversing a post-apocalyptic Manhattan. In September, Kashtanova secured a copyright for this AI-generated work, heralding a new era where AI art could be legally protected.

However, this triumph was short-lived. In February, the U.S. Copyright Office reversed its stance, stripping Kashtanova of their copyright protection. The reason? The office contended that the images in "Zarya" lacked "human authorship." Despite this setback, Kashtanova, with a formidable legal team, is once again pushing the boundaries of copyright law.

Seeking a "Human" Element in AI Art

For their latest project, an autobiographical comic, Kashtanova has turned to a different AI tool: Stable Diffusion. By initiating the creative process with original artwork that they refine using text prompts, Kashtanova hopes to infuse a vital "human" element into their work, potentially swaying copyright authorities. This approach prompts Kashtanova to assert, "It would be very strange if it's not copyrightable."

While the Copyright Office remains silent on these matters, and Midjourney and Stability AI offer no comments, the implications of AI-generated art and copyright law are profound.

Copyright's Future in AI Art

Billions of dollars hinge on the outcome of this debate. Granting copyrights to users and owners of AI systems could lead to significant benefits, allowing companies to generate and own vast quantities of cost-effective graphics, music, videos, and text for various purposes, including advertising and entertainment.

However, the path to AI copyright is fraught with challenges. The legal system has long held that an author must be a human being. Additionally, concerns arise about AI systems utilizing copyrighted material without permission, raising legal issues of copyright infringement.

Championing AI Copyright

One computer scientist, Stephen Thaler, asserts that his AI programs are sentient and deserve recognition as creators of artwork and inventions. He has engaged in legal battles, including a lawsuit against the U.S. Copyright Office, highlighting the complex questions surrounding AI authorship.

Yet, artists and content owners vehemently oppose granting copyrights to AI entities, fearing it would legitimize content theft.

Navigating the Gray Areas

Kashtanova's legal representation, Morrison Foerster, acknowledges that these questions pose significant challenges with far-reaching consequences. The Copyright Office's recent guidance emphasizes the importance of human creative control in determining copyright eligibility for AI-generated works.

As AI technology continues to evolve at an astounding pace, Kashtanova's experimentation with different AI programs and approaches raises intriguing questions about where the boundaries of copyright lie. Can a blend of human creativity and AI assistance redefine the notion of authorship in the digital age?

In the end, as AI and art converge, the quest for copyright clarity becomes more pressing, with profound implications for artists, creators, and the evolving landscape of artistic expression in the AI era. Kashtanova's journey represents just one facet of a complex and evolving narrative in the world of AI-generated art.