How you can use generative AI images — legally

Topic

New Reply

PUBLIC DEFENDER By Brian Livingston Suddenly, image-creation programs based on generative artificial intelligence (gen AI) have exploded into one of t
[See the full post at: How you can use generative AI images — legally]

6 users thanked author for this post.

SueW, fisher75, ibe98765, DLivesInTexas, geekdom, abbodi86

Reply | Quote

Replies

The “scraping” is a stupid argument. AS LONG AS it’s done from public sites (or paid-for image sets that have actually been paid for), they can’t complain.

It’s no different to a human browsing those images and thinking “huh that looks interesting” and having that image in mind for reference when making something new of their own. SOMETHING EVERY ARTIST DOES.

The AI generators are making images completely anew, they aren’t just cobbling together existing ones.

1 user thanked author for this post.

ibe98765

Reply | Quote

Exactly my thoughts.

Every artist/writer is influenced to some degree by previous works they have encountered throughout their lives.

I hope the judges who hear they cases bring this point forward in their questioning.

Reply | Quote

BobT wrote:

AS LONG AS it’s done from public sites (or paid-for image sets that have actually been paid for), they can’t complain.

AI software doesn’t pay for plagiarism‏‏‏‏ of images.

Reply | Quote

“Presenting someone else’s work or ideas as your own, with or without their consent, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement”

As AI generated images are COMPLETELY UNIQUE and generated anew, point to where the word has been “incorporated” into the finalised image.
Again, this is no different than having an image in your own memory after looking at it in a gallery.

Reply | Quote

Maybe they will make a billion $$ contribution to Wikipedia.

Just because you don't know where you are going doesn't mean any road will get you there.

Reply | Quote