> lead to you being in the wrong when copy other humans
How so?
> Why would it be any different if you as a human get an AI to copy another human compared to if you as a human use a paintbrush to copy another human?
No difference indeed. AI is just a tool, like Photoshop or a paintbrush. Unfortunately it's practically impossible to argue in court when two works are "substantially similar" at scale. This happens for extremely high profile cases atm, most artists are copied and never seen a dime, because the definition of "substantially similar" isn't black and white.
How so?
> Why would it be any different if you as a human get an AI to copy another human compared to if you as a human use a paintbrush to copy another human?
No difference indeed. AI is just a tool, like Photoshop or a paintbrush. Unfortunately it's practically impossible to argue in court when two works are "substantially similar" at scale. This happens for extremely high profile cases atm, most artists are copied and never seen a dime, because the definition of "substantially similar" isn't black and white.
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2022/feb/06/damien-...