Skip to main content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.
REPORT: When seeing is no longer believing: Inside the Pentagon’s race against deepfake videos
GAN Art Copyright is by FIRST HUMAN to place an original piece in tangible form.
Copyright belongs to person using tool not to the tool!
(At least as far as I know, in Oct, 2020. Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer) Think of a photographer versus a camera.
Food for thought: If AI art is more aesthetically pleasing than human generated art, why teach humans to art?
"Giarrusso outlines five different types of misinformation:
- Manipulated media: Photoshops, edited “cheapfakes” and some deepfakes.
- Fabricated media: Generated media, like fake faces, and some deepfakes.
- False context: When a photo, piece of video or even entire event is taken out of content and attached to a different narrative.
- Imposter media: When someone pretends to be a reputable news source, or impersonates a news source.
- Satire: Misinformation knowingly created for the purpose of entertainment or commentary."
What's up? Copyright and AI generated Creative Works
Food for thought: How could you prove that you did not use AI to create a work? Even hundreds of years ago, artists used tools like mirrors and shadows.
This person does not exist! Imagined by a GAN (generative adversarial network)
StyleGAN2 (Dec 2019) - Karras et al. and Nvidia (Don't panic. Learn how it works   )
Food for thought: If you can create Deep Fakes of actors, do you really need people anymore?
Image accessed from 10/19/2020 by AI tool at:
Can you guess which cat is real? 5 of the cats do not exist!
Food for thought... Will it matter to an artist studying anatomy whether the cat is real or not?
Images accessed 10/19/2020 from the following websites: