AI/LLMs AI art bans are going to ruin small 3rd party creators

Bill Zebub · 2026-03-31T03:32:09+0100

dbolack said:
As much as this gets dumped on Disney, they aren't the sole blame here. Copyright in the US was extended multiple times - the largest, IIRC, was to comply with the Berne convention.

That's exactly what a Disney lawyer would say.

(Just kidding. Yes, I agree. "Disney lawyer" is just convenient shorthand.)

dbolack · 2026-03-31T03:34:26+0100

Brendan Byrd said:
Alas. You’ve mistaken a criticism and expression of annoyance for an argument.

It may have been unclear, but I was attempting to agree with you.

gban007 · 2026-03-31T03:37:19+0100

Bill Zebub said:
That's pretty much the opposite of what I've been able to find. Prior to modern copyright law there was zero protection.

Mainly looking at below link, which i know is Wikipedia but I dont have access to much of the sources

Common law copyright - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

dbolack · 2026-03-31T03:38:12+0100

Bill Zebub said:
That's pretty much the opposite of what I've been able to find. Prior to modern copyright law there was zero protection.

A possibly interesting paper? https://via.library.depaul.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1662&context=jatip

Brendan Byrd · 2026-03-31T03:41:16+0100

dbolack said:
It may have been unclear, but I was attempting to agree with you.

Apologies.
I was lazy and didn’t check back to confirm which poster I was responding to upthread.

Justice and Rule · 2026-03-31T03:46:41+0100

dbolack said:
A possibly interesting paper? https://via.library.depaul.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1662&context=jatip

I found this one interesting, personally.

gban007 · 2026-03-31T03:47:30+0100

Bill Zebub said:
That's pretty much the opposite of what I've been able to find. Prior to modern copyright law there was zero protection.

And further sorry is looking at below link, witg history of some form of IP type protection.

https://www.euipo.europa.eu/en/news/ip-from-the-ancient-to-the-modern-age

Bill Zebub · 2026-03-31T03:52:36+0100

dbolack said:
A possibly interesting paper? https://via.library.depaul.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1662&context=jatip

By a law student?

Did you read it? I only got about eight pages in. It's pretty bad.

Bill Zebub · 2026-03-31T03:59:22+0100

Justice and Rule said:
I found this one interesting, personally.

Curious what you found interesting about it.

I thought it was notable that she mentions in footnote 4 that "there does not appear to be evidence of actual protection of literary property" but then she proceeds to build a substantial argument on contractual inference. This concession, buried in the footnote, should have been front and center.

Ha! I lied. That was part of Claude's analysis. He (she? it? they? Cthuhlu?) had a bunch of other interesting things to say, but I'll bet you aren't interested because it's just "AI slop".