Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8361748" data-attributes="member: 7023840">I appreciate the questions (and discussion). I will divide this into two parts-First, I honestly didn't think about AI. As [USER=762]@Mort[/USER] just pointed out, checking for images in patents (prior art) or trademarks can be expensive and time-consuming, and I had imagined this to be similar. But maybe not! I don't know how advanced things will be, or how quickly. For that matter, how confortable people will be with "good enough."Second, it doesn't really matter (from my P.O.V.). The reason that reputable companies running reputable contests have this language isn't to steal artist's IP- it's to protect themselves from a lawsuit. Now, the best form of lawsuit protection is to try and keep the lawsuit from ever being filed. Once you get into silly things like "facts" and arguing over those, you've already lost. And checking each and every time doesn't keep a lawsuit from being filed- it just gets you into "messy facts." (And the plaintiff would likely say, "That's evidence that they knew about my art ... after all, they were accessing it constantly!" I know ... people suck.) And that's how you need to view these types of provisions- it's to keep someone from filing in the first place, because if they do, it will result in a quick dismissal. They can't sue, because the company has a license to use it.Trust me- I understand how unsatisfying this can sound. Which is why I tend to think that, to the extent that people are saying that this is an issue that is adversely affecting creatives, the best answer is for corporations to just not have these contests.</blockquote>

Verification