Wow, If you have no understanding of copyright you should refrain from commenting on it.

1. You cannot copyright "looking like Daryl Hannah" as there is no creative work on that. You could copyright a picture of her as the photographer but that does not bar other people from taking her picture.

2. Fictional characters do get copyrighted, do some research on "sufficient delineation" As this is one of the metrics to determining copyright protection.

The Sufficient Delineation Test
The second test, and the one most often used by courts when grappling with extending copyright protection to a character, is the sufficient delineation test. The sufficient delineation test asks whether a specific character is “especially distinctive,” that is, whether the character displays “consistent, widely identifiable traits.” Some courts have broken this test into three prongs: (1) whether the character has physical as well as conceptual properties; (2) whether the character is recognizable through those identifiable traits whenever it appears; and (3) whether the character contains elements of original expression. The heart of this test is an attempt to determine the exact point at which the scale tips and a character no longer is a stock character but becomes a sufficiently delineated character protected by copyright.

You paid an artist to make you a Superman image, guess what, the artist violated copyright in a way that is not supported by fair use, as did the AI.

And with Superman being a sufficiently delineated character, even an original drawing of him would be considered infringement, no actual copying necessary.

Not sure what point you are getting at here.

If you thought your argument was anything more than trolling you would have left your name attached,
Being able to name the judge in a case is not "name dropping", but it does show the person has taken the time to research the issue.

If someone else's creation is making your image for you, YOU are not creating anything, prompt or no prompt.

If I ask a blacksmith to make me a sword, did I make the sword?

And the tool is making derivative works commercially so you'd be hard pressed to make a fair use argument.

Are you saying I did not buy games on Game Pass? Weird I have several MS games on Games Pass that I payed for and are not part of the sub.

To answer your last question, it will be (however well it is optimized), it has been well reported that this will be a feature of Windows 11 not just the Xbox Ally devices.

$899

https://www.theshortcut.com/p/...

Cannot be worn or sold in California, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington as they violate 2 party consent laws.

Just a side note FYI: In Barcelona only tourists eat paella. And it usually is fast-food paella, which tastes awful and is likely to give you an intestinal storm. Oh, wait, the bus company must be behind... Bus-Paella conspiracy, anyone?

... which would void your warranty because you're operating it beyond what the manufacturer has determined to be sustainable. Good luck convincing the dealership they should cover engine damage on a chipped car. That's not what we're talking about here. The specs on the cheaper model are artificially lowered as can be seen by comparing the specs on the same hardware installed in the upgraded model.

First of all, most of those statements are not mutually exclusive. A person can read and understand the specs and decide to purchase, but still feel ripped off.

Second, I did say "smells like corporate thievery," not "is corporate thievery." Take a course on ethics and morality, if you can find one. As a quick one-line course summary, there's a difference between morality and legality. Sadly, most MBA graduates seem to focus only on what's legal, and most CxOs would test positive on a psychopathy eval.

Wow. $35k for an upgrade; are you comparing a 4-cylinder Mustang with manual windows and no A/C to a customized Shelby GT500? Yeah, if there's hardly any parts in common, it's not a strange flex to prefer a big price difference. Ford wouldn't be able to sell their base model Mustang at a $600 discount off of a GT500. Again, that's not what we're talking about here.

But you did buy it upfront. All the hardware and software for that sportier experience is already in the vehicle... except for that toggle bit. If it required swapping in upgraded parts, an up-charge would be reasonable. But to differentiate price on toggling a bit on or off, while not uncommon in the world today, still smells like corporate thievery.

Heâ(TM)s not discovering anything, heâ(TM)s actively engineering it.

I think the Carrie Fisher thing is a little different case though. The footage of her in "Rise of Skywalker" was largely shot before her death and the script reworked to fit what they had, with some CGI cleanup and a flashback scene filmed with her actual daughter (Billie Lourd). The CGI version of Leia in Rogue One was something she was aware of and had actually seen. It's a lot different than totally creating footage that was never shot or making a digital puppet of someone say things they never said or "do" things they never did.

There is no dark side of the Moon, There's a far side, but it gets sun, especially during eclipses.

Looking at you post history, it's not surprising you don't care about rights.