Introduction: The Illusion of Copyright Protection
I’ve been thinking about this for a long time. Copyright law is an outdated relic of a bygone era—an era where creativity was scarce, publishing was controlled by gatekeepers, and protecting intellectual property actually meant something. Today, in a world where AI tools are everywhere, the idea that an artist needs government validation to claim their own work is ridiculous.
The U.S. Copyright Office’s latest AI report is proof of just how outdated the system is. The report confirms that AI-generated works can’t be copyrighted, but if an artist makes “enough” modifications, maybe they can be. But how much human input is enough? Who decides? Why should we care?
Creators shouldn’t need a stamp of approval to claim and monetize their work. The truth is, copyright was never about protecting artists—it was about controlling distribution and maximizing profit for corporations. And in today’s digital economy, creators don’t need copyright. We need better tools.
The Real History of Copyright: It Was Never About Artists
Copyright was never created for artists. It was created to protect the financial interests of publishers, printing companies, and later, big media corporations.
- The First Copyright Law (1710): The Statute of Anne was designed to protect publishers, not authors. It ensured that printing companies had exclusive rights to books for a set period—so they could control distribution and pricing.
- The U.S. Copyright Act (1790): America copied this model. Again, it was about protecting business interests, not empowering artists.
- Hollywood & Copyright Expansion (20th Century): Movie studios, record labels, and publishing companies lobbied for stronger copyright laws to extend their profits—not to benefit creators.
Let’s be real: who actually benefits from copyright today?
- Big corporations that have the resources to sue infringers.
- Lawyers who make millions fighting over intellectual property.
- Platforms like YouTube that weaponize copyright claims to control content.
Meanwhile, most independent artists don’t have the money or time to enforce their copyrights. And in the digital world, where images, videos, and music can be copied infinitely, copyright is just an illusion of protection.
Photography, AI, and the Fear of New Technology
What’s happening with AI-generated art today is exactly what happened with photography in the 19th century.
When photography was first invented, traditional artists and legal experts argued that photographs weren’t art because “the camera did the work.” Sound familiar?
- In Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony (1884), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that photographs could be copyrighted—but only if the photographer exercised creative control (lighting, composition, posing).
- The same vague standard is being applied to AI art today: if an artist uses AI, how much control is “enough” for copyright? The system doesn’t know how to answer this.
The real problem isn’t whether AI art is “real” or whether artists should be able to claim ownership. The problem is that the entire legal framework is outdated and irrelevant. AI, blockchain, and digital tools have changed everything. We don’t need old laws—we need new systems.
If Copyright is Dead, What Comes Next?
If copyright is irrelevant, how do artists protect and monetize their work? The answer isn’t more lawsuits—it’s better technology:
1. Blockchain & Smart Contracts: Proof Without Permission
- Blockchain lets artists timestamp and prove authorship without needing a copyright office.
- Smart contracts allow automatic licensing and royalty payments—no lawyers needed.
2. AI + Licensing: Own Your Process
- Instead of fighting for copyright, artists should embrace AI and define their own licensing terms.
- Tools like NFTs and decentralized platforms can enable direct sales, tracking, and resales with automated royalties.
3. Direct Monetization: No Gatekeepers
- Patreon, Substack, ARTstocker, and creator-driven platforms allow artists to sell directly to their audience.
- Instead of fighting piracy, artists can embrace accessibility and focus on building community-driven monetization models.
A Call to Artists: Stop Playing By Old Rules
Why are we still waiting for validation from institutions that don’t serve us? The Copyright Office, record labels, and publishers are scrambling to stay relevant—but they aren’t necessary anymore.
- Artists don’t need permission to own their work.
- AI isn’t a threat—it’s an opportunity to redefine creation.
- Copyright isn’t the future—blockchain, licensing, and direct ownership are.
It’s time for artists to stop playing by outdated rules and start creating a new system that works for us.
Copyright is dead. So what comes next?
Let’s build it.
Where Do You Stand?
What do you think? Is copyright still relevant in the age of AI and blockchain, or is it time to move on? Let’s talk. Find me on X and most social media sites with the handle @vlaneART
The post Death of Copyright: Why It No Longer Serves Creators & What Comes Next appeared first on vlane.ART.