Marcos. Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment! I appreciate that you have a lot of options for content like this and take my job seriously to provide the best I can each week.

As your question below, I see both sides of it pretty clearly. I think that art doesn’t move forward without people reaching back in time to include the style of artist they love into what they’re doing. At the same time some artist styles are so distinct, and obviously the result of years of labor and crafting, it seems entirely unfair to allow an AI tool to simply mimic that style and trade on it for free, and perhaps even dilute the value of that style nothing. I really wish I had a solution to this, but like so many other things in life I don’t think there is really a solution just tradeoffs.

Again, I appreciate your support. If you’re not subscribe, please do so so you don’t miss any of the weekly additions as they come out. Enjoy your summer.

Expand full comment

Great blog, I liked reading your perspective on the potential implications of AI advancements on the outcome of the case. The idea of AI-generated art 'in the style of' an artist raises interesting questions about creativity and intellectual property. How do you think the law should approach such works that draw inspiration from existing artists while incorporating AI algorithms? Would it be fair to restrict such artistic creations?

Expand full comment