Podcast Summary
AI art generators replicate human artists' styles without consent: Artists like Kelly McKernan are concerned about the implications of AI-generated art that closely resembles their work, raising questions about ownership, ethics, and the future of human-created art.
As artificial intelligence (AI) technology advances and becomes capable of generating human-like art, it raises concerns for artists whose styles are replicated without their consent. In the case of Kelly McKernan, an artist known for her ethereal femme figure paintings, she discovered that her name and style were frequently used as prompts for AI art generators. The resulting images were strikingly similar to her work, leaving her feeling violated and concerned about the implications for her livelihood and the future of human-created art. This trend highlights the complex relationship between technology and creativity, and the potential legal and ethical challenges that may arise as AI continues to evolve.
Artist's work replicated without consent in digital age: Artists must protect their intellectual property in the digital age as technology poses risks of unauthorized use.
The digital world can both inspire and infringe upon an artist's work. Kelly McKernan, a visual artist, gained a following on DeviantArt by sharing her creations for the love of art. However, when AI art generators emerged, her unique style was replicated thousands of times without her consent. People used her name as a prompt to create and sell art as their own. The situation escalated when DeviantArt introduced a subscription service that allowed users to generate AI art. Kelly felt violated and angry, as she had dedicated two decades to building a community on the platform. This incident underscores the importance of artists protecting their intellectual property in the digital age. While technology can provide new opportunities for creativity and reach, it also poses risks. Artists must be vigilant and proactive in safeguarding their work from unauthorized use.
AI-generated art copyright controversy: The use of AI to create art from pre-existing images has sparked a copyright controversy, with artists taking legal action against companies for using their work without consent.
The use of AI to generate art from pre-existing images has sparked a copyright controversy. DeviantArt, an online art community, trained an AI model on millions of images from its platform without obtaining consent from the artists. This led to frustration and a heated exchange between artists and the company's chief marketing officer. Some artists, including Kelly McKernan, took legal action against DeviantArt and two AI companies, alleging copyright infringement. The lawsuit argues that compressing and storing image information for AI models to learn from constitutes copying, and the resulting AI-generated art is a derivative work. However, legal scholar Andres Guaramez argues that AI models learn patterns, not the actual copyrighted material, and collage, as a fair use art form, might not be the best metaphor for AI-generated art. The outcome of this legal battle could set a precedent for the use of AI in art and copyright law.
AI use of artists' works in creative fields setting legal precedent: The ongoing legal challenge against AI companies for using artists' works to generate new art using AI technology could shape the future of AI in creativity and ownership, with fair use being a key consideration.
The ongoing legal challenge against AI companies for using artists' works to generate new art using AI technology could set a significant precedent in defining the legal status and norms around AI in various creative fields, including the visual arts and potentially podcasting. Fair use, which allows certain exceptions to copyright law, will be a determining factor in this case, as it pertains to uses of copyrighted works for education or transformative works. Despite one company, Stability AI, dismissing concerns as a misunderstanding of the technology and law, artists like Kelly McKernan feel that the use of their names and works without their consent is not fair. This case could have far-reaching implications, shaping the future of AI in creativity and ownership. This episode was produced by Noah Glick and Corey Bridges, engineered by Catherine Silver, fact-checked by Sarah Juarez, and edited by Kate Concannon. It is a production of NPR, and this message comes from NPR sponsor, Mint Mobile. Mint Mobile offers unlimited talk, text, and data plans for $15 a month when you purchase a 3-month plan, making it an attractive option for spring wireless bill cleaning.
Mint Mobile discounted offer vs Fundrise investment opportunity: Mint Mobile offers a discounted unlimited data plan with slower speeds after 40GB and upfront payment, while Fundrise presents an opportunity to invest in their real estate portfolio, which has become more affordable due to high interest rates.
Mint Mobile is offering a new customer deal for a discounted price on their unlimited data plan, but with slower speeds after 40 gigabytes, and an upfront payment of $45 for the first three months. Meanwhile, Fundrise, our sponsor, is presenting an opportunity to invest in their real estate portfolio, which has become more affordable due to high interest rates. The Fundrise flagship fund aims to expand its $1 billion portfolio, and interested investors can add it to their own at fundrise.com/npr. However, it's crucial to thoroughly review the investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses before making a decision.
