Volume Sixty-Eight: The Revolution of AI Copyright and Creativity Pricing, Chapters 366-370
Chapter 366: The Judicial Ruling of AI Painters
The federal court made a landmark ruling on the 'Phantom Painter' AI art platform: works independently generated by AI, with no substantial human contribution, belong to the AI's trainers and operators (i.e., my company), not to the AI itself or the users who provided vague instructions. Once the ruling was made, the art and tech communities were in uproar. Millions of freelancers globally who rely on AI to generate concept art and illustrations suddenly faced infringement risks, and the commercial value of their works plummeted to zero.
Chapter 367: Creativity Contribution Agreement
To quell the unrest, I swiftly launched the 'Creativity Contribution Agreement' (CCA). When users create with AI on the platform, their initial ideas, adjustment instructions during the process, and final selections and tweaks will be quantified and evaluated, sharing copyright and subsequent earnings according to contribution proportion. The built-in contribution assessment AI on the platform has become the 'referee' deciding the creators' shares, sparking endless debates on 'how to quantify inspiration.'