|
About This Author
Brandiwyn🎶Sprinting  , also known as Michelle Tuesday, is a musician, educator and writer hailing from Columbus, Ohio.
|
La Bene Vita
I am a professional musician , worship leader , small business owner , songwriter , aspiring author and freelance nonfiction writer with a chemical engineering degree .
But that's just my resume.
My profile of qualifications is only one of the ways in which I am unique. Here I chronicle my personal and professional goals and my efforts to achieve them. Occasionally I fail. Mostly, I take daily baby steps toward all my long-term goals. Much like the stories I pen, the songs I compose, and the businesses I run, I am always a work in progress.
November 19, 2025 at 8:35am November 19, 2025 at 8:35am
| |
"This second Part of the Copyright Office’s Report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) addresses the copyrightability of outputs generated by AI systems. It analyzes the type and level of human contribution sufficient to bring these outputs within the scope of copyright protection in the United States." - United States Copyright Office*
*full document linked at the bottom
I've been using ChatGPT and Google Gemini during the creation of my November novel this year. Examples of my prompts just within the last 24 hours include:
- Can you please propose a gen z / alpha way to say flip or flip out
- How about a Gen z / alpha way to say, that was uncool of her
- how about "preach" or "you're preaching to the choir"
- Does this sentence make sense: It jives with your natural affinity for animals.
- Do Gen z / alpha still use text abbreviations like y instead of why and u instead of you
(is my Gen X showing yet??)
The last two don't worry me at all, because the bot is answering a question, not offering text that I might incorporate into my book. But what about the first three? Are they perfectly fine, toeing the line, or are they clean over it? For example, if I asked Gemini:
Can you recommend a gen z / alpha way to say "I really blew it"
And Gemini responds:Click to see full response ▼
These phrases emphasize the level of the failure, ranging from serious error to complete self-sabotage:
1. The Failure/Loss Focus (Most Common)
These use terminology related to losing or failing, often borrowed from gaming culture.
 "I took a massive L." (L stands for 'Loss.')
 "I just fumbled that so hard." (Fumbled = messed up/dropped the ball, implying self-sabotage.)
 "I choked." (Classic sports term, meaning to fail under pressure.)
 "That was a complete fail." (Simple, but still very common.)
2. The Quality/Rating Focus
These use negative quality ratings to describe the mistake itself.
 "That was dogwater." (Meaning the execution/result was extremely bad.)
 "My performance was mid (at best)." (Mid = average/mediocre, implying a disappointing effort.)
 "I ruined the vibe." (Focuses on the social or environmental fallout of the mistake.)
3. The Self-Deprecating Focus
These express a sense of shame or overwhelming cringe about the error.
 "That's big yikes from me." (Yikes = expressing embarrassment, shock, or cringe.)
 "I'm cringing so hard at myself right now."
 "I'm about to de-live." (Dramatic exaggeration of wanting to vanish due to embarrassment.)
Recommendation:
The most common and effective phrases that capture "I really blew it" are:
"I took a massive L." (Concise and definitive.)
"I just fumbled that so hard." (Implies responsibility and a critical mistake.)
Does it render my work uncopyrightable if I use the exact phrase "I just fumbled that so hard" in my finished work? What if I just used the word "fumbled"?
I wanted to know, so I looked it up at the US Copyright Office website. Full disclosure: I skimmed the document to find relevant passages, so it's possible I missed something. However, my takeaway was that questions like this would be handled by courts on a case-by-case basis, and overall, the court will likely side in favor of the author. I based my finding on this passage:
“To be sure,” the Court further explained, “the requisite level of creativity is extremely low; even a slight amount will suffice. The vast majority of works make the grade quite easily, as they possess some creative spark, ‘no matter how crude, humble or obvious’ it might be.”
Copyright and Artificial Intelligence Part 2 - Copyrightability Report 
Literarily,
Michelle
|
© Copyright 2025 Brandiwyn🎶Sprinting (UN: tuozzo at Writing.Com). All rights reserved. Brandiwyn🎶Sprinting has granted InkSpot.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work.
|