Greg Rutkowski, a digital artist known for his surreal style, opposes AI art but his name and style have been frequently used by AI art generators without his consent. In response, Stable Diffusion removed his work from their dataset in version 2.0. However, the community has now created a tool to emulate Rutkowski’s style against his wishes using a LoRA model. While some argue this is unethical, others justify it since Rutkowski’s art has already been widely used in Stable Diffusion 1.5. The debate highlights the blurry line between innovation and infringement in the emerging field of AI art.

  • snooggums
    link
    fedilink
    41 year ago

    Is drawing Mickey Mouse in a new pose copying the style or copying Mickey Mouse?

    • @ricecake@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      You said it yourself. You’re drawing Micky mouse in a new pose, so you’re copying Mickey mouse.

      Drawing a cartoon in the style of Mickey mouse isn’t the same thing.

      You can’t have a copyright on “big oversized smile, exaggerated posture, large facial features, oversized feet and hands, rounded contours and a smooth style of motion”.

    • conciselyverbose
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      The second.

      I’m not sure how that’s relevant here, though. There is nothing at all being copied but an aesthetic.

      • tqgibtngo
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There is nothing at all being copied but an aesthetic.

        Although to me it is interesting that, even without literal copying, a generator might be capable of potentially emulating some key features of a specified source. Can this sometimes arguably extend beyond just “an aesthetic”? We’ve all seen examples similar to this one (from the SD online demo, default setting, with a familiar public-domain source) — https://i.imgur.com/PUJs3RL.png