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?

    • That wouldn’t make sense as the output is derivative of the prompt.

      It would also mean that if you take a picture with your phone you could only claim copyright to the RAW image, not the final output, as an AI has done its colour grading and denoising stuff all over it.

      And as far as I understand it that’s also the position of (US) courts: Sufficient creative input before and/or after the mechanical part.