Is AI Art Legal? (Copyright Nightmares)

Are machines stealing our creativity? Or is it just progress? What do you think about it? 🤖💡

#ai#aipredictions#aicopyright

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[thommccarthy]

I know it's futile but any attempt to wipe this evil shit from the face of the earth is noble.

[Malthizar]

I get why artists would feel a certain kind of way but this has no legs. It's more of a conversation starter than an actual lawsuit. The AI isn't copying the art. It's copying the art _style_ .

If we seriously start trying to copyright a style of physical drawing art, it only makes sense that we start trying to copyright how people talk or act. If I'm doing a William DaFoe accent in my movie, does that mean I owe him a check?

This is just the old guard trying to stymie change since they feel their profession is on the chopping block. In reality, while many of the lesser artists will have to look at other avenues, the cream of the crop will be able to make even more money when this is all said and done

[Egeria_is_dead]

Style should not be copyrighted. That's basically saying that only one person can have an anime art style. That's taking the job of mangakas. And only one person can have a semi-realistic artstyle where there is a lot of shines in it that'll take a lot of digital artists' job. So it's like a sword with two edges, one you'll get rid of AI ar but on the other hand a lot of people will lose their job

[randombleachfan]

I think where it draws the line is most likely the art style. Artist can already look up pictures of anybody on the internet and incorporate those things into their art. Therefore, if an AI incorporates those things based on user-input is most likely okay.

What the problem is the process of the style of art that is being copied/remixed with other people's art style. Right now I am trying to figure out what I can do about that situation, maybe I can do my own art style and start feeding my art style to stable diffusion so that hopefully, me and other people who use my art style can avoid copyright issues.

[alexadigitalradio]

I, as a human, can look, read or hear something and copy it OR, use what I learned and generate something new. If I use what I learned and don’t copy things either exactly or very similarly, that’s fine in terms of copyright. I don’t see a difference because AI isn’t copying things. It learns from them. This is why I take issue with generalizations about AI that don’t take into account the nuances. The abilty to prompt “in the style of” is all that needs to go, not AI art or music itself. That type of prompting is where you end up with most plagiarism. Otherwise, there’s a need for the public to understand how AI learns and generates something before making judgement on it.

[augustuslxiii]

Strongly disagree. And I've been making my own art since elementary school. (Not much profit, back then, but hey.) I can understand on an emotional level why artists feel like wrongs have been done to them, but nothing has changed except speed.

People learn from other people; AI just does it faster. Do I owe the guy who drew a cartoon style first some money because I got inspiration from his style? Of course not. Should all people drawing cartoon animals have to give some of their income to Disney? No. Does everyone drawing their own Sonic fan art owe Sega a cut? Nope.

Why? Because you can't own a style.

Just because AI learns faster doesn't change the fact that new works are being created. Artists own their own works, but again: they cannot own a style. (Same for authors and musicians.)

The idea that a style legally belongs to a person isn't rooted in logic or reason at all. It's just really unfair-feeling when someone (or, now, something) uses it.

[Julia-dkox]

ich denke im DACH Raum wird man über Copywriting mit AI 10x nachdenken wollen, bevor man es ernsthaft anwendet.

[k.rahimi]

Do you think humans do anything else than 'remixing data'?

[LS-kgmy]

And AI is not copyrightable, so anyone can reproduce and sell an AI image legally

[rickesping]

Naa, it's BS.
Digital painting is just another form of artistic expression. It's no different than when oil paint artists made in ay for acrylic and watercolor painters it's just another medium. Different artists work through painting is there any good AI art is not going to replace it.

[Geilolp.]

Are you saying styles should be copyrighted? My man, thats not how it should work

[diaxpora]

Why not just pay micropay each artist registered on the blockchain and included (tagged) in the prompt?

[Iamwolf]

We might actually see some artists choosing not to complain about this form of automation and instead embracing it for its advantages.

[samthesomniator]

Not a remix. AI is not photobashing!

Get this straight people! PLEASE! That leads to nothing when you are confronting that issue!