AI-Written Articles Are Copyright-Protected, Rules Chinese Court (worldipreview.com) 41
A Chinese court has ruled that AI-generated works are entitled to copyright protection, in a win for tech giant Tencent. From a report: According to state media outlet China News Service (CNS), a court in Shenzhen this month ruled in favour of Tencent, which claimed that work created by its Dreamwriter robot had been copied by a local financial news company. The Shenzhen Nanshan District People's Court ruled that, in copying the Dreamwriter article, Shanghai Yingxun Technology Company had infringed Tencent's copyright. Dreamwriter is an automated writing system created by Tencent and based on the company's own algorithms. According to the reports, Shanghai Yingxun reposted a financial report written by Dreamwriter in August 2018 without Tencent's permission. The question of whether AI-generated works are protectable under copyright law have been the subject of much debate.
Whatever copyright means... (Score:5, Funny)
...in China...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Just like the USA, its meaning has changed and will continue to change from this [ipwatchdog.com] to that [eff.org]. "Copyright violation" is not a patent of China, neither "patent trolling" a patent of the USA. Get down from your moral high horse.
Re: Whatever copyright means... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Ivan, patents were never trade secrets.
That's the whole point of patents; if not for the patent, they would try to keep it secret.
I have a feeling the Russian side of the google translate round-trip is ending up as "intellectual property" for all these different specific terms.
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright did not even exist in China until recently, and then only because other countries pressured them into it.
It still doesn't have squat for patent protections.
They do what they want, when they want. Their laws in these regards are a laughingstock.
implying stealing is a good thing. (Score:2)
Seriously... how brainwashed are you kids today?
Copyright is when you go "sign" a creator to work for you, paying him each time he works, but *you*, instead of earning your money with actual work, like a honest person, magically start treating this service business as a *manufacturing* business, creating a "product"! You then "sell" that "product", asking money for every "item".
Nevermind that that "item" is just a copy. Let's just gloss over that information is not a physical object itself. (That would be t
Re: implying stealing is a good thing. (Score:2)
I have a bad feeling about this... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Compiler output can be copyrighted. How is this different?
Re: (Score:2)
Humans write the source code... at some level.
Re: (Score:2)
What about Computer Generated Art? (Score:2)
You bought a copy of After Dark Screen Saver.
You broadcast that screen saver on public TV. Do you need to pay After Dark Royalties?
How about if your broadcast software fails and you are broadcasting your Windows 10 Desktop should you pay Microsoft Royalties for showing Microsoft Art?
Re: What about Computer Generated Art? (Score:1)
What? (Score:2)
Putting he words âcopyright,â(TM) âcourt,â(TM) and âChineseâ(TM) in one sentence gives it a very high amount of internal stress.
Interesting viewpoint (Score:2)
Interesting view point for the "People's Republic" to take.
I mean if a machine (capital) can literally produce literary content that is than owned by the original capital owner of the AI... Well that does not leave much room any workers to derive any economic opportunity does it.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems obvious but... (Score:2)
Any work created on behalf of a company should be copyrightable by that company so I'm not sure why that would be considered unique here.
OTOH - AI is going to tend to create based on a common pattern like a recipe. So even if the work is created, if everyone uses AI to create articles they're all going to "written" nearly identically making copyrights tricky if both parties said they used AI to create them.
Re: (Score:2)
Any work created on behalf of a company should be copyrightable by that company so I'm not sure why that would be considered unique here. OTOH - AI is going to tend to create based on a common pattern like a recipe. So even if the work is created, if everyone uses AI to create articles they're all going to "written" nearly identically making copyrights tricky if both parties said they used AI to create them.
So much wrong here...
Company can "own" copyrights, but not all property (or work) owned by a company is eligible for copyright protection.
Work created "on behalf of" is licensed to the company by the creators, who have their own sovereign (and freedom of use) rights.
Computer systems (e.g. "A.I.") do not possess sovereign rights; they are programs/tools of their users. This whole article is absurd because it removes that simple fact from the equation. Further, the computer system is given full credit -- no
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That isn't what the OP is saying. What is the difference if a work is produced by a person or a computer program? It is still potentially copyrightable and owned by the company.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Work created "on behalf of" is licensed to the company by the creators, who have their own sovereign (and freedom of use) rights.
Yeah, no - you have no idea what you're talking about.
Protect bots, shortchange humans ... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like all the people on here who rip off the work of human beings by using torrents or Pirate Bay?
Infinite Monkey Theorem? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Untrue, the Klingons are still protecting it.
What they forgot to say was... (Score:2)
Domain squatting is now LEGALLY PROTECTED?! (Score:2)
Of course they did (Score:1)
>> a court in Shenzhen this month ruled in favour of Tencent
Wouldn't expect anything else.
But why should the rest of the world respect China's version of copyright, when they are unwilling to do the same?
We'll see how it shakes out, if China ever produces something unique and worth copying,
Re: Of course they did (Score:2)
Does the AI retain the lawyer (Score:2)
Library of Babel Wins! (Score:1)
No, they are not (Score:2)
No matter what China thinks
Awesome! Now we can cut out the middle-man! (Score:2)
No more enslaving artists to do actual work for a one-time chump change payment! ... while we can just click "generate" ... doing zero work whatsoever ... *And we can steal all their money!!* Mwahahahahaa!
Finally, all entertainment will be *literally* formulaic!
Now we can steal from our victi... I mean customers, without anyone doing any work *at all* in return! They might have to work hard all day, to make those 100 bucks
And get this: We will even make THEM make the copy! Aka "streeeaaming". *And tell them
China and Intellectual Property (Score:2)
Two words you never expect to hear in the same sentence. So Chinese robot work is protected, but any overseas IP is up for grabs (and by grabs I mean profit making endeavors) - yeah, that sounds like China.
Al? (Score:2)
On the next episode of IlIlIlI when fonts suck IlIlIlI - is that a zero?
Re: (Score:1)
Million Monkeys on a Million Typewriters (Score:2)