Oh look, the local proud pumpkin is at it again - confidently handing out advice straight from another galaxy. Don’t listen unless you’re aiming to fall flat on your face.
Oh, and by the way, yes, there
are cheats from the project, and all his “brilliant bug tips” are for an outdated version of the game. Total vintage nonsense. As always lol.
"If AI is used as part of the image creation process -for example, if the AI generates a base and then it's redrawn by hand — can the final image still be protected under copyright as the creator's original work?"
Short answer:
If a person adds a meaningful creative contribution to an AI-generated image, then yes - the final artwork can be protected under copyright as the author’s original work.
More details:
What is not protected:
- Fully AI-generated images with no human input.
- Simple edits like color changes, cropping, or filters — those aren't enough to claim copyright.
What can be protected:
If you take an AI-generated image and
redraw it, add original elements, modify the composition, or make creative decisions, that’s considered
human authorship.
In this case,
you own the rights to the final image, and it can be protected by copyright law.
Example:
- AI creates a rough concept of a character.
- You take that concept and completely redraw it, add facial expressions, outfit details, background, and adjust the art style.
- The result is now your original creation, and you're the legal author.
Copyright laws (depending on the country):
- Most countries (like the US, UK, and EU) require a human creative effort for copyright.
- Using AI as a tool is fine - as long as the final result reflects your personal artistic input, you can still claim copyright.
Links:
U.S. Copyright Office – Artificial Intelligence and Copyright
Official resource from the U.S. government, explaining how copyright applies to works created with or by AI.
You must be registered to see the links
The fact that Uber’s just using AI as a tool is obvious to anyone who’s ever even
touched AI in their art workflow - except maybe some completely out-of-touch old-school boomers (no offense, Pumpkin ).
Also, let’s not forget the classic ongoing debate in the art community about fan art - like, does an artwork still belong to the artist if it’s based on someone else’s IP?
As far as I understand it, the answer goes something like this:
Legally, the fan art is still based on someone else’s IP, so the original creator owns the rights. However, the artist owns the specific expression (the drawing itself), but use is limited without permission.
In other words: don’t take Pumpkin’s bad advice too seriously. Big hugs
