『AI Is Hiding Bodies and Money』のカバーアート

AI Is Hiding Bodies and Money

AI Is Hiding Bodies and Money

無料で聴く

ポッドキャストの詳細を見る
Writers, if you’re letting AI write your scenes, your chapters, or your books, I have one question: What exactly do you own? I went looking for answers and found the bodies—the AI Gamble can cost you everything.An influencer and trademark lawyer, Jennifer Brantley (@thefineprintlawyer on IG), posted a really interesting reel about why AI might be “hiding the bodies.”It was provocative, particularly in light of some of the publishing deals we’ve recently seen fall apart.I’ve talked before about the case of a young Black author reportedly on the verge of a nearly $2 million deal—only for the deal to collapse.Now, we don’t know exactly why that happened, and I don’t want to pretend that we do. But Brantley’s reel raised an interesting possibility: What happens when an agent or publisher loses confidence that the work they’re buying was actually written by the author?And more specifically: What happens when they don’t know how much AI was used to create it?That sent me straight down a research rabbit hole.Because Brantley brought up something I had not seriously considered before:AI-generated material may not be protected by copyright.Now, y’all know I occasionally play a lawyer on Substack. And as a historical-fiction writer, I spend an obscene amount of time researching things, weighing evidence, trying to figure out what actually happened versus what somebody merely said happened.So I went looking and found facts:In January 2025, the U.S. Copyright Office released Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, Part 2: Copyrightability.In this report, the U.S. Copyright Office says:“Copyright does not extend to purely AI-generated material.” (page iii)Y’all see that? Getting ChatGPT, Claude, or any of the others to draft a novel means it can’t be copyrighted.The report also says:“Copyright protects the original expression in a work created by a human author, even if the work also includes AI-generated material.” This means the lawyers and the U.S. Copyright Office will have to play Solemn and split your baby into pieces, figuring out which parts belong to which mother.The part of the novel creation process where AI can be used for research and brainstorming is allowed, as I stated in Receipts Please, but if you think your human control comes from designing a prompt for the AI, guess again. According to the U.S. Copyright Office on page 18:“prompts alone do not provide sufficient human control.”In other words, simply typing an AI Prompt like, Write me a novel about X or a scene about Y or a chapter with A-P level of specificity, does not make you the author of that expression for purposes of copyright.Think about the danger you’ve put your idea in by having AI write it. There is a ton of what people call “AI slop” being sold right now—on Amazon and elsewhere. Books and other products that someone may have generated substantially or entirely with AI and then put into the marketplace.These products make money. Lack of copyright protection doesn’t magically claw back the money somebody already earned selling something.But what happens when somebody else copies that same AI-generated material?What exactly does the purported author own? What can they defend?I’ve had conversations with showrunners, and Hollywood is buzzing, hunting for unique IP, intellectual property. I’m talking about books being acquired for serious money—especially books with film and television potential. Copyrighted books are IP.Imagine somebody is prepared to invest seven figures in a property because it is deliciously marketable. Everybody can see the movie. Everybody can see the limited series. People want the rights.Except now, the buyers are asking who actually wrote this?If substantial portions of the manuscript were generated by AI, those portions may not have copyright protection. No one’s going to pay big bucks for 2/3 of a manuscript. And what stops the studio from now running with the idea without you? They can because there’s no copyright.Suddenly this isn’t merely an ethical debate about whether writers “should” use AI.It’s a chain-of-title problem.It’s a rights problem.It’s a due-diligence problem.It’s a very expensive problem.And to be clear, the Copyright Office is not saying that touching AI makes your book uncopyrightable.Quite the opposite.On page 41 of the report, the US Copyright Office says that using AI as an assistive tool does not prevent copyright protection. Human-authored material remains protectable. Human creative selection, editing, coordination, and arrangement may be protectable. Creative human modifications of AI-generated material may also qualify for protection.But this line drawn in the sand is fuzzy. Figuring out what one actually has is the new problem.If AI gives you something and you substantially transform it, what portion is yours?How much modification is enough?What constitutes sufficient human creative control?For those who ...
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
まだレビューはありません