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.

  • Samus Crankpork
    link
    fedilink
    81 year ago

    Aside from all the artists whose work was fed into the AI learning models without their permission. That art has been stolen, and is still being stolen. In this case very explicitly, because they outright removed his work, and then put it back when nobody was looking.

    • @I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      4
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Let me give you a hypothetical that’s close to reality. Say an artist gets very popular, but doesn’t want their art used to teach AI. Let’s even say there’s even legislation that prevents all this artist’s work from being used in AI.

      Now what if someone else hires a bunch of cheap human artists to produce works in a style similar to the original artist, and then uses those works to feed the AI model? Would that still be stolen art? And if so, why? And if not, what is this extra degree of separation changing? The original artist is still not getting paid and the AI is still producing works based on their style.

      • Samus Crankpork
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        Comic book artists get in shit for tracing other peoples’ work all the time. Look up Greg Land. It’s shitty regardless of whether it’s a person doing it directly, or if someone built software to do it for them.

      • @wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        Fine, you win the semantic argument about the use of the term “stealing”. Despite arguments about word choice, this is still a massively disrespectful and malicious action against the artist.

      • @CallumWells@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        Strictly speaking it wouldn’t exactly be stealing, but I would still consider it as about equal to it, especially with regards to economic benefits. It may not be producing exact copies (which strictly speaking isn’t stealing, but is violating copyright) or actually stealing, but it’s exploiting the style that most people would assume mean that that specific artist made it and thus depriving that artist from benefiting from people wanting art from that artist/in that style.

        Now, I’m not conflicted about people who have made millions off their art having people make imitations or copies, those people live more than comfortably enough. But in your example there are still other human artists benefiting, which is not the case for computationally generated works. It’s great for me to be able to have computers create art for a DnD campaign or something, but I still recognize that it’s making it harder for artists to earn a living from their skills. And to a certain degree it makes it so people who never would have had any such art now can. It’s in many ways like piracy with the same ethical framing. And as with piracy it may be that people that use AI to make them art become greater “consumers” of art made by humans as well, paying it forward. But it may also not work exactly that way.

        • Otome-chan
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          People aren’t allowed to produce similar styles to other humans? So do you support disney preventing anyone from making cartoons?

          • @CallumWells@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Now you’re making a strawman. Other humans that are actually making art generally don’t fully copy a specific style, they draw inspiration from different sources and that amalgamation is their style.

            Your comment reads as bad-faith to me. If it wasn’t meant as such you’re free to explain your stance properly instead of making strawman arguments.

      • Samus Crankpork
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        So you hire people to trace the original art, that’s still copying it, and nobody is learning anything. It’s copying.

        • Harrison [He/Him]
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          They didn’t say trace. A good artist can use the style of another artist when creating a new work.

          • Samus Crankpork
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            Yeah but a computer can’t, no matter how much people want to believe it can. Not with current tech.