Isn't most creative work synthesis rather than unique whole-cloth creation? Look at what happens with software when it is open sourced and allowed to be remixed freely. Are we better or worse off because of it?
There's nothing that prevents people from remixing things that are not copyrighted and create something amazing that others are interested in or of cultural value.
With open source, I should note, its remixing is in fact governed by copyright.
I think the idea is if "AI" can solve math proofs that humans haven't for a century then if "AI" freestyles stolen art and literature then it might create something as good if not better because of resources and processing power
There might be something to that logic but art and literature doesn't obey rules like math and copyright exists to protect creators
Isn't most creative work synthesis rather than unique whole-cloth creation? Look at what happens with software when it is open sourced and allowed to be remixed freely. Are we better or worse off because of it?
There's nothing that prevents people from remixing things that are not copyrighted and create something amazing that others are interested in or of cultural value.
With open source, I should note, its remixing is in fact governed by copyright.
Possibly. Sort of like how Disney remixed basically everything from existing fairy tales for decades then made it so nobody else could.
Yes? I don't understand how this is even a question, this is exactly how it worked throughout human history.
In what way is copyright preventing it today?
I can't make and sell a remix of an existing IP and even in cases of free distribution it can get dicey legally.
I think the idea is if "AI" can solve math proofs that humans haven't for a century then if "AI" freestyles stolen art and literature then it might create something as good if not better because of resources and processing power
There might be something to that logic but art and literature doesn't obey rules like math and copyright exists to protect creators