Trademark Attorney Amy
Region: US
Tuesday 23 June 2026 23:24:12 GMT
11095
474
111
94
Music
Download
Comments
WittyUserName77 :
Ai steals designs from what could be copyrighted material without your knowledge so how is that not a problem to address first.
2026-06-24 12:05:55
14
xtbvidz :
I’m an illustrator, and I don’t generate entire illustrations from scratch using AI with a prompt. however, I DO manually create an illustration entirely myself and get it 80-90% “complete” - then I run it through AI to make it look 100% polished and finished. I get fantastic results, and it’s MY art. good luck to ANYONE trying to argue that it’s not MY work just because AI was used in that workflow.
2026-06-24 17:13:59
3
Nader :
it's a blurry line right now , but pretty soon AI generated works will be all free , including music ..
2026-06-25 17:53:26
1
byronstepherson :
I see the point of the ruling, but what about this scenario? It is my position that when I commission the creation of artwork, whether by an individual artist or through a paid digital service, the resulting work constitutes a work made for hire. When I engage an artist to produce a piece according to my specifications and provide compensation for that work, I understand myself to be the sole owner of the resulting artwork, and the artist retains no ownership rights, claims, or control over the final product. Likewise, when I pay for access to a professional‑tier generative system (such as a subscription to Gemini) and provide the prompts, direction, and specifications that determine the content of the output, I consider that transaction to function as a commissioned work. Because the output is generated at my direction and produced through a service for which I have paid, it is my position that I hold full ownership of the resulting artwork and that the service provider retains no ownership rights or claims to the generated material. The artwork, which belongs to me, should be able to be copyrighted and protected by copyright
2026-06-24 20:01:01
3
jawedsayed786 :
Most people are missing the point. AI is a tool, not the creator. The real issue is creativity. Copyright should protect the human creativity behind a work, regardless of whether it was created with a pen, a camera, or AI.
2026-06-24 16:33:20
6
Ron Scherbinske :
I don't agree because the AI generated the image from your specific instructions in the prompt.
2026-06-24 03:23:14
6
GelaGaming :
I believe if I were to author an AI generated image with an extremely detailed prompt that specified everything down to extreme scale, then there would be enough human creativity to have to become protected.
2026-06-25 11:28:49
1
Kevin Marquette :
I see AI as a tool we use and you can't tell how much human vs AI involvement there was without the human telling you. Yes, some is obvious but that's not the case for everything.
2026-06-24 02:48:46
3
DK :
But AI doesn’t create image by itself. You still need to write the prompt. That’s “meaningful human author”. Right?
2026-06-25 00:11:18
2
Fireteller :
There is no such thing as fully AI generated. AI is not self motivated, it is a tool that must be acted upon by a human to function at all. The mechanism is poorly differentiated from any other mechanical tool.
2026-06-24 21:00:01
4
bec000000 :
what about code btw?
2026-06-24 09:51:41
0
Van Thieu :
Unless, the AI was trained from your work, technically it's and extension of you ✌😅
2026-06-24 16:23:00
0
Not Really The Platypus :
I agree with the ruling. artificial intelligence, artificial creativity, artificial art.
2026-06-23 23:32:18
4
. :
What if the art is made in the style of an artist? I read an article about this about a year or so ago & that is a major concern for many..
2026-06-24 12:47:16
0
Tony | Fixes Everything :
It was a human behind AI so the creation is still by the human who created the AI.
2026-06-25 14:27:32
1
luna 🏳️⚧️🏳️🌈🇦🇺 :
thats not what the judgement was. 🙃
2026-06-24 18:28:19
0
RollyMusic :
yep, and the argument of taking photos does not apply because it is a person who actually is.
2026-06-25 13:05:11
0
mrnicepotato :
You don’t always get the perfect output. AI is not autonomous. The user must think of and try different prompts. So the prompter is the owner as that person has already paid for the electricity and for the usage of the AI model.
2026-06-25 19:21:43
0
a24896128 :
Well what about the effort that it took to create an image? the image you see? it’s probably the outcome of many many images that failed, and if you’re using like comfy UI with all the diffusion models there’s a lot of work to make something right for a seed image, but of course many people just give a simple one sentence prompt and get something but not everything’s like that though, how do we differentiate? I guess you have to have all your work recorded and Doc. at least on your computer to where you have the workflow and everything so you could prove yourself?
2026-06-25 06:50:41
0
VertiJenn :
as someone who has watched AI in short dramas, the AI people look the same. Even when generated from other peoples prompts.
2026-06-25 17:40:25
0
Juan Parada :
IP = the prompt as a work of art (writing)?
2026-06-25 18:14:40
0
t3inity :
Obsurd. lol if the person use their own image to generate something new, they should be copy right protection….., their law will destroy ai if they make this kind of ridiculous laws.
2026-06-25 09:38:53
0
Enticing Conversation :
basically with anything Ai a person would have to take the image/music/story and edit it in such a way that it makes it so there is sufficient human input and creativity applied to it.
2026-06-25 07:49:41
0
Robin D Parker - Author :
creative direction. this is up to a court to decide how much direction was human decision, colours textures location camera settings lighting, clothing, and so much more
2026-06-25 07:25:29
0
Janne Be Good🇵🇭🇸🇪 :
if someone that creates it almost 100% with AI and put it up for sales, it's free for anyone that wants to pay for it. It's not against the law to pay for something that you can get for free. AI music on Spotify and YouTube will probably get paid. Though some day they might stop that since that share is taken from the pool that also has real creators. There was even a guy that created and uploaded music to Spotify and then created a lot of ai bots that listened to that (and probably other random) music. The level was low to avoid detection. But in the end they caught him and he now faces fraud charges. The other side of the coin is the input side. Who owns a voice or appearance that is very close to the real person. Especially "celebs". Today I uploaded an image of my face and asked Gemini to make a Indiana Jones style trailer video using that image. I do look a bit like the actor and with the clothes and hat it was hard to see if it was him or me.
2026-06-25 09:09:40
0
To see more videos from user @amyonbrands, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
