Question about ownership of ai art
Art, being an expression of one’s ideas brought forth, has many classical and modern forms, but I’m still skeptical about calling ai art “art”.
With every established art form the first person to have brought the creation into being is the one who claims the artwork to be their own. But with ai, the lines between who created the piece is blurred. On one hand you have a person’s novel idea that they want to express, so they have a lesser intellect generate/create it by prompting them with the details they want included. On the other hand the lesser intellect is the one putting in the efforts to make those demands, and it the one at the end of the creation pipeline who finishes the product. Because of the joint effort put in between the two beings, which one should be able to claim they created the art? The one with the original input, or the one interpreting the input? If the ai is the one that has a rightful claim to the art then does that mean people shouldn’t be able to monetize its works as their own, or that they simply have to disclose what made the art? And if the art belongs to the human then can it truly be considered art if it did not come from their own interpretation of their thoughts, but rather the interpretation from an ai pretending to have the ability of expression? Is there a nuance between the other two scenarios that blend either answer into a more complex solution?
