This article is simplistic and wrong. It's not enough to simply transform the copyright material, it's not a panacea. The existing copyright code provides a fair use doctrine that is sufficient for this novel use, and you really only need to change the law if you want to take away copyright protections.<p>From my previous comment:<p>Given the potential economic impact on the original artist, the mechanical nature of the transformation and the fact that extracting the style of an artist's work could be deemed substantive, fair use is not in the least bit a slam dunk.<p>One could argue that use of this sort of AI robs the original artist of the fruits of their labour, neutering copyright protections, and produces works that substitute for the originals, without adding any creative input other than commanding the output from a machine. Given the intent of copyright law, judges would likely be receptive to this argument.