Part 2: Controversies and Complaints in GitHub Form 📢🤖

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in art has sparked debates as concerns emerge about potential plagiarism. Some claim that AI algorithms, meant to create unique artworks, may unintentionally copy the styles of established artists. Additionally, there are accusations that certain AI developers deliberately program algorithms to imitate specific artists, raising ethical questions about the boundaries between inspiration and imitation. This situation prompts a critical examination of the challenges and implications of AI art potentially engaging in plagiarism within the contemporary art scene. Recently, many artists have been throwing complaints about seeing their work without creating it, for example:

Greg Rutkowski

Greg Rutkowski, a digital artist from Poland, employs classical painting techniques to craft enchanting fantasy landscapes. Renowned for his illustrations featured in prominent games like Sony’s Horizon Forbidden West, Ubisoft’s Anno, Dungeons & Dragons, and Magic: The Gathering, Rutkowski has swiftly garnered acclaim in the emerging realm of AI-generated images through text-to-image algorithms. He was interviewed by BBC (AI: Digital artist’s work copied more times than Picasso in which he states his concerns on AI Art and about his work getting plagiarized.

Beeple (Mike Winkelmann)

Beeple is a digital artist who raised concerns about the unauthorized use of his digital artwork in the creation of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and AI-generated art. His work, “Everydays: The First 5000 Days,” became particularly notable in the NFT space, and he has spoken out against instances where his art was used without permission in AI-generated projects.

Obvious (Hugo Caselles-Dupré, Pierre Fautrel, and Gauthier Vernier).

The art collective Obvious gained attention for creating an AI-generated artwork titled “Portrait of Edmond de Belamy.” While they were creators of AI art themselves, they expressed concerns when others used their code to create similar AI-generated portraits without proper credit or authorization.

Sam Yang form SamDoesArt has released a YouTube video (Why Artists are Fed Up with AI Art? explaining his concerns and point of view on this situation. He quoted “ AI art is leaking into the mainstream in the form of stable diffusion and Lensa, but there are serious ethical concerns with this unregulated tech. I’m NOT anti AI, in fact, I believe AI can be of immense benefit to us in the future. But the ethics of AI in its current state MUST be talked about”.

The Issue

When AI generates art, it doesn’t create content from nothing; it requires input for output. Machine learning companies, like Stability AI, profit from high-quality media, depending on AI trained on specific datasets. These datasets, such as the LAION-5B, contain billions of images and texts, including copyrighted materials and private data, often collected without owners’ consent. This includes personal artworks, photographs, and even images of individuals and their environments. The use of such datasets in commercial products raises legal and ethical issues. While initially intended for research, these databases have been commercialized, leading to products like Dream Studio and Stable Diffusion. This practice circumvents the need for licensing fees for using images, effectively exploiting artists’ work without credit or compensation, leveraging a legal loophole. This situation presents a complex challenge regarding the ownership and compensation of intellectual property in the age of AI-generated content.

Activists

Some notable figures and groups have emerged in activism against AI-generated art, highlighting the concerns of traditional artists. Joyce Silva, an environmental artist, used Twitter to voice her opposition, creating a collection of anti-AI images that garnered significant attention. Her efforts reflect a broader sentiment among artists about the impacts of AI on their work and rights​​.

Karla Ortiz, a well-known illustrator who has worked for Ubisoft and Marvel Studios, is another prominent figure in this movement. Along with cartoonist Sarah Andersen, Ortiz is part of a group of San Francisco artists taking legal action to address the unauthorized use of their styles and works by AI programs like Midjourney and Stable Diffusion. This lawsuit aims to reclaim copyright and consent for artists, a crucial issue as AI-generated art becomes more prevalent​​.

The resistance to AI-generated art is not just legal but also technological. For instance, a team at the University of Chicago developed “Glaze,” a software designed to protect artists’ work from being mimicked by AI-art models. This tool acts as a digital shield, making it difficult for AI to analyze and replicate the protected art styles​​.

Internationally renowned film director Guillermo del Toro has also voiced concerns over AI image generation, especially in the context of animation and art. His stance reflects a growing resistance worldwide to the unregulated use of AI in creative fields​​.

These individuals and initiatives represent a broader movement among artists and creators to safeguard their rights and creative integrity in the face of rapidly evolving AI technologies.

People and Their Thoughts

MarkCooprArt

MarketingHarry

<img width=”564” alt=”Screenshot 2024-01-18 193614” src=”https://github.com/Khadija-mahmoud/ai_art_plagiarism_post/assets/150390985/1f3322f4-56cc-4c15-b8bb-7ae4b560a7

be”>

nathannaelfong3781

4XPEDITION

Understanding the Debate

The debate over whether AI-generated art should be held to the same standards as human-created art is multifaceted and ongoing. On one side, proponents of AI art argue that it represents a new frontier in creativity, offering innovative ways to create and experience art. They suggest that AI can democratize art creation, allowing more people to engage in artistic expression.

Conversely, many traditional artists and critics argue that AI-generated art lacks the intrinsic human qualities that define art, such as emotion, intention, and creativity originating from human experience. They contend that AI art, while technically impressive, often borrows heavily from existing human-created works, raising issues about originality and intellectual property rights.

This debate also touches on the impact of AI on the art market and professional artists. There are concerns that AI could devalue human art or replace human artists in certain contexts, thereby affecting livelihoods and the perception of art as a human-centric endeavor.

In essence, this debate centers on the definition of art, the role of the artist, and the impact of technology on creative expression. It’s a conversation that reflects broader questions about the integration of AI into society and its impact on human culture and professions.

To see the other point of view on why AI Art is not plagiarizing and is important go to part 3 of my blog 🌟🤖

Click Here for Part 3: The Shifting Legal Landscape of AI-Generated Art

Click here to go back

Sources

AI Got Me Cancelled Why AI Artists are Fed Up CNN: AI Art Ethics ChatGPT4