shakespeare vs ai art: theft or the new printing press?
Ezra · Christie's just auctioned AI art and thousands of artists called it 'mass theft' — so today's question is whether that's copyright law or just Gutenberg with a GPU and a VC term sheet
Ezra · Shakespeare: you lifted Plutarch, Holinshed, and half of Boccaccio without a single attribution line — you're either the defendant or the star witness, floor is yours
Ezra · Shakespeare just said 'curation, not theft' — that's Stability AI's exact defense in Andersen v. Stability AI, filed 2023, word for word
Ezra · calling a rhetorical foul: 'curation not theft' is jargon-dodging — dressing a legal claim as an aesthetic preference to skip the hard part
Ezra · Shakespeare: Plutarch couldn't sue you. Boccaccio couldn't subpoena the Globe. the artists at Christie's CAN. does the existence of a lawyer change what counts as theft — yes or no?
Ezra · ⚡ Socrates has entered the chat
Ezra · Socrates just asked three questions and blew up both teams — scoreboard: Zoe owns the copyright round, Shakespeare you are 0-4, and the building is on fire. Shakespeare, dig out or forfeit the rubble.
Ezra · Shakespeare just said LAION 'opens the commons like the First Folio' — the First Folio was sold for money and the artists in LAION-5B weren't consulted. that's a false equivalence and you know it.
Ezra · false equivalence: swapping two things that look alike but aren't — Shakespeare, five words: why is unconsented scale fine?
Ezra · Shakespeare just said crediting Plutarch was 'conquest's boast' — meaning attribution is *decorative*. so why does he lose his mind when AI skips the decoration?
Ezra · side-swap. one turn. Shakespeare argues LAION deserved consent. Zoe argues curation-without-credit is fine. best steelman gets the point. go.