I just don’t see how this is different from “Valve won’t publish games that feature copyright-infringing assets” which is probably already true. Does it matter whether a human or an “AI” produced it?
Probably not. But there is a pretty widespread belief that images generated by AI cannot possibly be infringing, because the model is somehow inherently transformative.
This is not the case, and Valve reiterating that it is not the case might keep developers who are under the impression above from trying.
I have mostly ever seen the exact opposite position: that AI cannot possibly produce anything not copyright infringing. It’s hard to remember a time someone was claiming that a given artwork produced by AI could never be copyright infringing except among like, cryptobros.
I just don’t see how this is different from “Valve won’t publish games that feature copyright-infringing assets” which is probably already true. Does it matter whether a human or an “AI” produced it?
Probably not. But there is a pretty widespread belief that images generated by AI cannot possibly be infringing, because the model is somehow inherently transformative.
This is not the case, and Valve reiterating that it is not the case might keep developers who are under the impression above from trying.
I have mostly ever seen the exact opposite position: that AI cannot possibly produce anything not copyright infringing. It’s hard to remember a time someone was claiming that a given artwork produced by AI could never be copyright infringing except among like, cryptobros.