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

AIs don't need to "eat", therefore they don't need copyright protection, if someone duplicates the work the AI produces it doesn't jeopardise that AIs livelihood as it doesn't have a livelihood. Copyright is a bargain intended to enlarge the public domain and reward creative people for the creative works they make.

Yes, we reward AI makers by giving them copyright protection over their work, we don't - and shouldn't in my personal opinion - reward machines. Why would we, what's the benefit in human terms? There's no moral hazard in turning a machine on and off when we need creative works that the machine is programmed to make or don't need more of such works.

Copyright protections that serve the wealthy owners of AIs whilst they simultaneously undercut creative people producing simulated culture (cheaper than actual culture) would not serve the demos.

The creator of the AI still needs to eat. Your suggesting that AI developers should effectively have none of the existing legal protections for software and other creative works. Also, the "bargain" clearly applies to AI applications. Why/how would anyone start a business like https://brandmark.io/ if the generated logos have no legal protection?

Applications are open for YC Summer 2020

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