Not relevant. Figma v. Motif was over allegations of stealing source code, apparently including known Figma bugs.
The design of the UI wouldn't be covered by copyright anyway; Figma would have had to file and be granted a patent, which has a much higher bar (IMO not high enough, but that's a different discussion).
I don't know how much of it was hand-edited and how much was direct output, but this article has that unmistakable LLM voice. The rhythm, the rhetorical flourishes; it's all there even if it's diffused through some human revision.
The really weird thing is going to be when people start internalizing the LLM voice and writing that way. It's probably happening already.
I've seen many people do the latter, I get quite annoyed by it. Worst of all is wondering if I'm affected by it myself, I doubt most people who've gotten an 'LLM writing style' know so themselves.
Eventually no space where people can just 'publish' things will be safe from being completely filled with LLM writing/video/images. The only way to combat it is by forcing people to get punished for this behaviour and making it difficult to circumvent.
Some invite system where people get punished for the bad people they bring in, one that's linked to your identity/workplace/education. Even if these options were available, I doubt many people would care enough, they'd rather be in 'enshittified ' spaces.
They will probably be there for as long as the capacitors last, but the critical thing is that they are almost certainly running some Win32 industrial process software with no need for web browsers or for that matter even Internet connectivity. In fact I hope they’re not on wifi given the state of legacy WinXP security!
Air gap. If you don’t want content to be used without your permission, it never leaves your computer. This is the only protection that works.
If you want others to see your content, however, you have to accept some degree of trade off with it being misappropriated. Blatant cases can be addressed the same as they always were, but a model overfitting to your original work poses an interesting question for which I’m not aware of any legal precedents having been set yet.
Big IP holders will go nuclear on IP licensing to an extent we've never seen before.
Right now, there are thousands of images and videos of Star Wars, Pokemon, Superman, Sonic, etc. being posted across social media. All it takes is for the biggest IP conglomerates to turn into linear tv and sports networks of the past and treat social media like cable.
Disney: "Gee {Google,Meta,Reddit,TikTok}, we see you have a lot of Star Wars and Marvel content. We think that's a violation of our rights. If you want your users to continue to be able to post our media, you need to pay us $5B/yr."
I would not be surprised if this happens now that every user on the internet can soon create high-fidelity content.
This could be a new $20-30B/yr business for Disney. Nintendo, WBD, and lots of other giant IP holders could easily follow suit.
The next step is to take this beyond AI generations and to license rights to characters and IP on social media directly.
The next salvo will be where YouTube has to take down all major IP-related content if they don't pay a licensing fee. Regardless of how it was created. Movie reviews, fan animations, video game let's plays.
I've got a strong feeling that day is coming soon.
This is the first image model I’ve used that passed my piano test. It actually generated an image of a keyboard with the proper pattern of black keys repeated per octave – every other model I’ve tried this with since the first Dall-E has struggled to render more than a single octave, usually clumping groups of two black keys or grouping them four at a time. Very impressive grasp of recursive patterns.
If you ask it for anything outside of the standard 88 key set it falls short. For instance
"Generate a piano, but have the left most key start at middle C, and the notes continue in the standard order up (D, E, F, G, ...) to the right most key"
The above prompt will be wrong, seemingly every time. The model has no understanding of the keys or where they belong, and it is not able to intuit creating something within the actual confines of how piano notes are patterned.
"Generate a piano but color every other D key red"
This also wrong, every time, with seemingly random keys being colored.
I would imagine that a keyboard is difficult to render (to some extent) but I also don't think its particularly interesting since it is a fully standardized object with millions of pictures from all angles in existence to learn from right?
Reminder that even in the hypothetical world where every AI image is digitally watermarked, and all cameras have a TPM that writes a hash of every photo to the blockchain, there’s nothing to stop you from pointing that perfectly-verified camera at a screen showing your perfectly-watermarked AI image and taking a picture.
Image verification has never been easy. People have been airbrushed out of and pasted into photos for over a century; AI just makes it easier and more accessible. Expecting a “click to verify” workflow is unreasonable as it has ever been; only media literacy and a bit of legwork can accomplish this task.
Competent digital watermarks usually survive the 'analog hole'. Screen-cam resistant watermarks have been in use since at least 2020, and if memory serves, back to 2010 when I first starting reading about them, but I don't recall what it was called back then.
I just tried asking Gemini about a photo I took of my screen showing an image I edited with Nano Banana Pro... and it said "All or part of the content was generated with Google AI. SynthID detected in less than 25% of the image".
This is pretty clearly an LLM-written sentence, but the list structure and even the em dashes are red herrings.
What qualifies this as an LLM sentence is that it makes a mildly insightful observation, indeed an inference, a sort of first-year-student level of analysis that puts a nice bow on the train of thought yet doesn't really offer anything novel. It doesn't add anything; it's just semantic boilerplate that also happens to follow a predictable style.
I think you mean "LCD/LED" monitors (where "LED" is commonly used to mean an LCD panel with an LED backlight, and "LCD" is used to differentiate old CCFL-backlit LCD panels).
OLED screens do not have a backlight and thus don't have a diffuser.
The design of the UI wouldn't be covered by copyright anyway; Figma would have had to file and be granted a patent, which has a much higher bar (IMO not high enough, but that's a different discussion).
reply