Well, it may be legal to create such a painting, but (depending on details) it may be a derivative work, in which case the original work's copyright still applies.
In other words, in your example, the painter is not necessarily free to distribute their painting while ignoring the original image's copyright.
Of course, this is not about the works. This is about the painter, and it's mostly not about exact duplication of the work but about works based on their previous work. You know, like other painters do.
Ostensibly, they want to prevent OpenAI, and any algorithm from making works based on their work.
But, frankly, what they really want is not really that. What they really want is to prevent it from making any works at all.
Comments
Well, it may be legal to create such a painting, but (depending on details) it may be a derivative work, in which case the original work's copyright still applies.
In other words, in your example, the painter is not necessarily free to distribute their painting while ignoring the original image's copyright.
Of course, this is not about the works. This is about the painter, and it's mostly not about exact duplication of the work but about works based on their previous work. You know, like other painters do.
Ostensibly, they want to prevent OpenAI, and any algorithm from making works based on their work.
But, frankly, what they really want is not really that. What they really want is to prevent it from making any works at all.