Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Shutterstock would say that the model is a derivative work of their images, much like a photograph of a painting is a derivative work of the painting despite being in a different medium.

They would say they are owed licensing fees regardless of whether the shutterstock logo appears in the output. The appearance of their logo in the output merely proves that the system's outputs are derived from their copyrighted images.



Wouldn’t the appearance of shutterstock’s mark suggest to the consumer that the provenance of the image was shutterstock, when it is not?

But upon the absence of the mark, shutterstock would argue that the provenance of the image WAS shutterstock?

I don’t think this is the salient feature of this phenomenon, but the proximity of these two arguments is interesting.




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

Search: