Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Only if the robot has its own corporate entity. Otherwise, like any machine, it's not a person under the law.

Then how could it produce a copyrightable work? The Berne convention only applies to 'Nationals and residents' of a country. Therefore if a court has held that the robot produced copyrighted material, then the robot must be a person.

Because under the law, it didn't produce the work.

Look at all the AI-driven visual art we're seeing happen. Copyright goes to the artist who set up the system and then selected the work, because that's the actual creative activity.

Creators have always used tools. The tool isn't what gets copyright, no matter how elaborate the tools. Once the tools have consciousness, drive, and self-determination, we might think otherwise. But that's not where we are today.

Applications are open for YC Summer 2020

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact