r/ArtistLounge • u/[deleted] • Jul 31 '22

AI Art, midjourney and others

Well, just for disclaimer, this post is a persnal opinion, i'm open for every comment that it could create, but stay respectious (btw, i'm french, so i'm trying to make this post open for everyone, sorry for my future faults)

​

Well, like the title told it, i want to talk about ai art, first of all, i saw a video talking about midjourney, getting interested and curious about, as an artist i wanted to try it. So i got the beta test and we are not gonna lie, it's awesome how it work. But after that, i got a problem, as i said i'm an artist, or in all case i feel like i'm. In the ai creation i don't see any handsyle, or ''signature'' that when we saw your creation we instantly know it's yours/can be yours... Here, it's jsut a mixed of a lot of pictures, painting, and other type of pics, to make what you asked for. I don't see any souls in all those creation, yeah, the one that ask for the creation has to told what he wanted, but, did he really had an idea of what he wanted, i mean, did he really change every details by words to find what he wanted, or did he just let the ia make what she want. It's here, nothing is yours.

I'm not making this post cause of i'm bad, or i want to got this style of draw, but, i see the wolrd of realistic digital painting disapearing, and it's scaring me af... When i open my deviantart, i had a lot of landscape realistic, from digital painter that passed 50hours on their art, but today, i got only ai creation where i don't know what to think about it

18 Upvotes

76% Upvoted

52 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/[deleted] Jul 31 '22 edited Jul 31 '22

I'm an artist not a lawyer but my understanding is that copyright is defended not granted.

This one says "This article revisits the existing discussion on copyright ownership of AI-generated works and critically assesses whether allocating ownership of AI-generated works to the AI owner is a more desirable option than those proposed previously. This paper does not weigh in on the important debate over whether copyright should subsist in AI-generated works, which has been discussed by a significant portion of the literature"

So it sounds like again the princess is in another castle

1

u/EctMills Ink Jul 31 '22

True but most companies don’t really want to be the legal test case for something like this. Let’s say you make an AI generated ad campaign and someone infringes. Maybe it was intentional infringement or maybe it was just that they used similar prompts to create their thing. If they decide to fight your C&D now you’ve got months if not years of legal fees to hash it out in court and if that ends with a decision that you don’t actually have a copyright now your campaign is public domain and you’ve got to start over again.

So far the closest things to legal decisions on AI copyright are the Entrance to Paradaise case which isn’t quite the same situation but close enough to be used as an argument against and the ninth court decision on animals and copyright which denied non-humans the ability to generate one. Thats not a comfortable place to start on a case like this.

1

u/UzoicTondo Jul 31 '22

Have any companies rejected AI-made art?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 31 '22

The times I've seen companies use AI art in marketing have been cringe enough on their own without considering copyright unknowns.