True. Artists could already draw Britney Spears or Seth McFarland in unfavorable light with traditional animation. South Park does it all the damn time. What they do is protected under parody, but someone drawing a fan image of Robert Downey Jr. and selling it would be fine, so long as it didn't include any trademarked Marvel stuff like the Ironman or Avengers likeness/logos.

The thing about these LLVMs is they don't really store the original work. You can't go into that massive set of layers with billion

Copyright law is completely corrupt, Hollywood stole out culture from us so they can rip us all off. I refuse to pay for movies, cable or streaming and I avoid buying new books because I won't support unethical and classist industries that' cheated us and perverted our laws. Piracy is a responsibility in age of culture control and economic exploitation. The media moguls and the superstars are perfect examples of self-aggrandizement, greed and arrogance.

That more or less does away with copyright. So while that knock off of horizon zero Dawn is definitely a okay because that's just a stylistic thing (and Sony stole it from zoids anyway) if you have the character from horizon zero Dawn and started putting her in your own games I think that should be a bridge too far.

On the other hand our basically perpetual copyright system is all kinds of fucked up. Author's life + 20 years to let the potential kids grow up would be the most I could see. Even that's lo

Copyright is about single works. But trademark is about identity of said characters.

A CHARACTER'S style or appearance, no. But a specific artist's performance of that character? That feels like a creative work by that artist to at least 50% degree.

To be clear, I wish indeed that we were debating the first principles and original intent of copyright but let's be honest, current interpretation is a rather far distance from those.

The principles that are in play today - eg the ones that have girded the inviolate title/ownership of a cartoon mouse for 50 years past the creator's death (which

Like many things, this will all get sorted out in the porniverse before it makes its way out into the rest of the internet.

I wonder if they'd be *more* successful with shorter copyright?

If copyright was (say) 20 years, then fans (and AI companies!) could be making all sorts of derivative works from 20 years old stuff, instead of stuff made more recently. It's probably possible for the AI scrapers to roughly even get those dates right themselves - if it looks like $film_released_before_2005 then it's okay, otherwise no. As it is, copyright is so unimaginably long, that people are just ignoring it completely, not least because wo

> If GenAI can make as good a movie as troop of thespians, team of writers, camera operators and directorial staff, VFX studio and associated staff, all while doing it cheaper and faster, why not? While some people are worried about 'jobs' there certainly isn't the same 'omg omg omg, the customer support reps' there isn't even the same sentiments for internal devs cranking out CRUD apps being replaced with 'vibe coders'. This entire concern here is just Hollywood Neppo-Baby Privilege talking. They are 100% right about the threat it represents to the them though. If you can make a decent 1:30 clip for next to to nothing, you can do the same thing with a 1:30:00 art-house film for not much more, and it won't be long after a few successes there you can do feature films. A-List Actors, and big Hollywood Studios are probably seeing the beginning of their final act here.

OK...so what if a Hezbollah studio "can make as good a Marvel movie as troop of thespians, team of writers, camera operators and directorial staff, VFX studio and associated staff, all while doing it cheaper and faster, why not?"...would you let them? OK...Thor and Iron Man will now team up and fight the Zionist threat. Oh Superman and Homelander have joined in as well...oh no...the Jews have brought their western allies in to help...and the Americans all turn into xenomorphs...slaughtering the faithful...now Omni Man has come in to save the day!!!!

Or let's just make it a porn...Omni-man fucks superman...in their suits while Hawkeye gobbles superman in his mouth...should someone be able to make money off it?

Your argument forgets the entire history of entertainment. if you come up with an idea, someone else can't steal it just because they can make it better, faster, cheaper. We don't need Generative AI to make clones of movies...any studio can make a knock off version. Porn companies have been doing that for a long time...trying to make money off it...and getting sued if their parody is too close. Foreign studios have long made knockoffs...and gotten sued if they tried to distribute internationally.

You make hate entertainment companies...and that's cool & all...but this is a business....people shitting out this generative AI slop want to monetize their lazy efforts built on the name recognition of companies that spent over 50 years building up IP and lore. It's illegal for good reason...not your irrelevant nepo-baby rant, but because no...it's fucking hard work making a good story and character...I suggest you try it and see how hard it is...any idea you have in your head? 90% chance it's just some other story you heard from another writer...OK, you have an original idea?...taking a cool idea into a decent script?...really fucking hard....nearly every bad movie ever made started with a cool idea and got ruined by a bad script. Lots of extremely talented individual shit out horrible work. A great example?...Avatar...James Cameron is as talented as they get and Avatar 2 is boring AF....really high quality from talented people, but no one cares!!!!...same with Ridley Scott's Prometheus movies.

If you eliminated protections, you'd only get lazy, low-effort human slop...like reality shows. No one would risk millions to create complex stories if they can be stolen.

or the entitled redditor could just .. learn to draw? ... The stuff Sora is making is something a regular animator could make in Maya, Autodesk, etc. It would just take a good animator 3~6 days for a 7 min clip the models could make in 5 minutes. People use to have to put in efforts for their jokes. Even with the AI generation, the really funny producers still edit the generated clips together, write the scripts, clean them up, add in some real video here and there. It's a speed up process more than anythin

Its tricky because just about every company I have to deal with in my personal life doesn't pay me when they want to have fun with my credit history.

They are not appropriating anything, they are remixing and creating derivative works, something that people have done since the dawn of civilisation, something that has expanded the abundance of culture, and something that the original form of copyright was not meant to put a stop to (since copyright was invented to serve that abundance, not the creators). Why on earth should content creators get to control derivative works and levy a tax on them? It's absurd. You get paid for your own work, which is what copyright exists for. You should not get paid for someone else's work, even if that other person re-used some of your ideas. Even if (god forbid!) they make a buck with their work?

Screw these entitled content creators; copyright (and moral rights) have been preverted beyond recognition, and need a reform. Not gonna happen though... but I feel not a shred of remorse for authors whose work now gets remixed in AI.

I mean we all know they are just making porn.

Hey now... it's not just teenage boys making dumb memes, it's people who ACT like teenage boys making dumb memes.

But, yeah, if you like video clips of Queen Elizabeth eating a bag of flaming hot Cheetos, you have a "wonderful" new source of content!

whats worse is its already fallen into "trends" the people prompting the videos arent even creative enough to come up with their own idea for the AI to make, they just see what someone else prompted and think "ooh i should prompt that too"