OpenAI limits what users can do with the service, using keyword filters and tools that can identify certain types of images that may be considered offensive. Others have built similar tools — such as Midjourney, used by Guadamuz to mimic Stålenhag — that may differ in their rules about proper use.
As access to AI art generators widens, more artists are questioning their ability to mimic the work of human creators.
RJ Palmer, who specializes in drawing fantastic creatures and worked on the film as a concept artist Detective Pikachu, says curiosity prompted him to try DALL-E 2, but he also got a little nervous about what such AI tools could mean for his profession. He was later shocked to see users of the open source image generator Stable Diffusion exchanging tips on how to generate art in different styles by adding artist names to a text prompt. “If they feed the work of living, working artists who, you know, struggle as is, that’s just mean,” Palmer says.
David Oreilly, a digital artist who has been critical of DALL-E, says the idea of using these tools that feed on previous work to create new works that make money feels wrong. “They don’t own any of the material they’re reconstituting,” he says. “It would be like Google Images charges money.”
Jonathan Løw, CEO of Jumpstory, a Danish stock image company, says he doesn’t understand how AI-generated images can be used commercially. “I am fascinated by the technology, but also deeply concerned and skeptical,” he says.
Hannah Wong, a spokesperson for OpenAI, released a statement saying that the image creation service was used by many artists and that the company had solicited feedback from artists during the development of the tool. “Copyright law has been adapted to new technology in the past and will have to do the same with AI-generated content,” the statement said. “We continue to explore artists’ perspectives and look forward to working with them and policymakers to protect creators’ rights.”
While Guadamuz thinks it will be difficult to sue someone for using AI to copy their work, he expects lawsuits to follow. “There will definitely be all kinds of lawsuits at some point — I’m sure of it,” he says. He says infringing trademarks such as a brand’s logo, or the image of a character such as Mickey Mouse, can be more legally onerous.
Other legal experts are less certain that AI-generated knock-offs are on solid legal grounds. “I saw lawsuits arise from the artist saying, ‘I didn’t give you permission to train your algorithm on my art,’” said Bradford Newman, a partner at law firm Baker Mckenzie, who specializes in AI. “It’s a completely open question who would win such a case.”
Updated 8/19/202, 12:25 PM EDT: This article has been updated with additional comments from Guadamuz.
