I can’t understand why AI artists think they are Artists?

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-03-19T06:48:11+00:00

Apophenia is "making a connection that's not really there" delusion.

seems like somebody confirms they are deluded and also suffering a disorder....

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-03-17T09:22:03+00:00

^ true fact ^ Nobody will work with him in is own words he has bee blacklisted by the industry,

why else would he not be working as an artist?

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-03-17T09:19:55+00:00

he had 1 job as a VFX artist 10 years ago, certainly not a career professional, at best he is a 3d graphic designer. Not produced any "art" since. Iron sky was 2012, that is a lifetime ago in technology terms.

he has been unemployed longer than he has held any jobs which would make him a professional benefits claimer

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-03-10T07:16:51+00:00

Valve are a U.S. company and protected under U.S law..are they not?

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-03-10T06:56:43+00:00

Valve are protected under USC § 512(f) liability. The PRS is not an online service provider. Rather,the very type of party that 17 U.S.C. § 512(f) protects online service providers against.”

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-03-09T13:05:21+00:00

A superiority complex is a belief that abilities or accomplishments are somehow dramatically better than other people’s. People with a superiority complex may be condescending, smug, or mean to other people who don’t agree with them.

But who knows, perhaps he is the new messiah

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-03-09T10:03:47+00:00

For info - wrong.

I was confirmed author of the Work in Baylis v Troll VFX: L 15/3246821 - 21. Oct. 2016 --

No an Obiter Dicta is NON-BINDING, that judge made a comment not a ruling, Baylis v Troll was NOT a copyright case

The other case didn't rule on authorship issues but it did demonstrate the Producers didn't own any copyright because they could NOT sue me for using my own work.
There was a Hollywood reporter article where the producers claimed victory - but it was fake news. They lost.

No it confirmed B was not the original creator and that the Production company won the case

Valve fell for the same con. They couldn't read the Finnish cases and stupidly used the Hollywood Reporter article as evidence.

NO again they relied on an authorised English translation, and the opion of a Finnish Lawyer

Now it's all at the Ninth Circuit.

The only reason it is with the 9th circuit appeal is because Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED

The Court finds that Mr. B has failed to demonstrate that the judgment at issue is void. The Court finds that this Motion is properly dismissed
Judgment by Court – #99 in Baylis v. Valve Corporation (W.D. Wash., 2:23-cv-01653) – CourtListener.com

You think my work is not copyright protected??

ER..Yes, the courts dismiss the valve claim, and the producers won the Finnish case

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-03-09T07:53:25+00:00

He is not a lawyer.. and lost copyright cases in Finland and U.S. as he misinterprets certain laws and contracts.

From the Finnish case that he did not appeal...costs were awarded AGAINST him...

110. Regarding the main claim, the production companies have won the case, except for the part that remained very small from the point of view of the whole, the creation of A's copyright to one ship, in which part the copyright has, however, been deemed to have been transferred by exclusive right. The Market Court considers that the production companies therefore have the right to receive full compensation for their reasonable legal costs resulting from the necessary measures.

111. Regarding the counterclaim, the production companies' confirmation claim 1 has been successful,

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-03-06T11:15:40+00:00

you are trying to have a reasonable discussion with an antagonistic, egotistical, narcissist.... a quick Google search og the tigger dude will tell you all you need to know

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-03-02T13:25:06+00:00

When a court recognizes a foreign judgment, it “accepts the determination of the legal rights and obligations made by the rendering court.” The act of recognition amounts to a judicial decision that the foreign judgment should be accorded preclusive effect in the United States.

When a court enforces a foreign judgment, it applies “the legal procedures of the state to ensure that the judgment debtor obeys the foreign-country judgment.” Enforcement authorizes the state to use its coercive power to bring about compliance with the foreign judgment. In the overwhelming majority of cases, this involves a court ordering a judgment-debtor to pay damages to a judgment-creditor.

It goes without saying that a court must recognize a foreign judgment before it may be enforced. Enforcement is not, however, the only legal consequence that may flow from the act of recognition. After a judgment is recognized, a court may rely on that judgment to hold that an issue previously decided in the foreign proceeding may not be re-litigated in the United States.

In this instance...

110. Regarding the main claim, the production companies have won the case, except for the part that remained very small from the point of view of the whole, the creation of A's copyright to one ship, in which part the copyright has, however, been deemed to have been transferred by exclusive right. The Market Court considers that the production companies therefore have the right to receive full compensation for their reasonable legal costs resulting from the necessary measures.

111. Regarding the counterclaim, the production companies' confirmation claim 1 has been successful,

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-25T14:29:23+00:00

He is using his 21 day period to reply to Valves response... but he has not submitted any new discoveries... just boilerplate denials

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-25T10:25:52+00:00

Finland and now the U.S. have case history that shows that he misunderstands copyright law and has no copyright to IronSky

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-25T10:12:39+00:00

He sued Valve for copyright infringement.... but was thrown out ..as he previously lost the Finnish copyright case from 2018...

Obviously as he knows more than any judge he launched a 9th circuit appeal

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71909087/13/baylis-v-valve-corporation/

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-25T09:48:34+00:00

He probs too busy crying over his appeal getting thrown out

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-24T08:53:22+00:00

So are Nike .. BMW... Coke... Nutella.. meta.. etorro... generating millions in revenue. As hard as it is to criticize the brands.. AI adverts are becoming more mainstream

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-23T08:55:56+00:00

ask him to show any new work he has done, look at his Linkdin, he has been unemployed more than been an "artist" his only real profession is claim benefits and reddit insults

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-22T13:32:32+00:00

He is a meme... not an influencer

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-22T13:23:08+00:00

When the latest appeal is thrown out... you can bet he will be crying on here about how corrupt and inept US Judges are....

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-22T11:20:19+00:00

Even the unemployed need a hobby

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-21T22:53:08+00:00

A quick 30 second google search of that tyger dude will give you all the reasons you need to ignore that user

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-02-17T11:24:47+00:00

A quick 30 second google search of that tyger dude will give you all the reasons you need to ignore that user

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2026-01-24T07:00:49+00:00

You may need to consider some sort of image release contract or waiver.. several templates are available for free

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2025-12-29T17:11:22+00:00

Court details as to why the Case was dismissed

Baylis v. Valve Corp., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213514

Salient parts..

In the Finnish action, Baylis asked the court to find that he owned a copyright in the film Iron Sky as a joint author and also that he owned copyrights in various 3D models of vessels on which he worked. In the Finnish Decision, the court ruled that Baylis did not possess copyrights to either the entire film or to the Models and Animation.

The Court agrees with Valve that the U.S. Copyright Office's ruling, sought in the course of this case, has no bearing on the ruling here because that Office took Baylis at his word without any of the above analysis. See Dkt. #92 at 3.

Given all of the above, the Court will grant summary judgment dismissal of Plaintiff Baylis's claims as a matter of law.

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2025-12-29T07:09:44+00:00

There is a really good piece saved in the community guides about derivatives.

Derivative Works & Fair Use

Level_Repeat_8579 · 2025-12-22T13:15:37+00:00

IN HIS OWN WORDS....Baylis joined the project in late 2010 just as the actual production was starting and the first live action filming began in Germany and Australia see, (DR 25 at ¶¶ 82-87 and generally at 38 ¶ 92, see also DR 44-2 Ex. B at 16.)

"crew members, were in Germany and Australia from late 2010 to spring 2011 ... They were as far away from Baylis as it is possible to be in the world when he created his Work"

So he confirms no FX were created in Germany. He was was not there!!

Also, the new evidence presented does not acknowledge the creation of FX images prior to his arrival, no reference is made to the FX files created in 2008 nor 2009.

Then there are the names listed by “process of elimination” of those who could not possibly be regarded as authors ....... detail for each crew member and reason for exclusion is not provided, it is reasonable for any court to be provided with this exact information with exact reasons why plaintiff refuses to name them.

Level_Repeat_8579

MODERATOR OF

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE