3 ms·

The problem I see here is that ML-generated art may be based on real art. While human painter may repeat style of fragments of work of other artist as homage,

The problem I see here is that ML-generated art may be based on real art. While human painter may repeat style of fragments of work of other artist as homage, computer software does it more as plagiarism. This isn't much different than issues surrounding Microsoft GitHub Copilot.

Kiro 4y ago
And neither would constitute as plagiarism by the legal definition of it. Yes, it's a problem that they are trained on material without consent but what they produce is something totally new and not even close to plagiarism.
- nottorp 4y ago
  > what they produce is something totally new It is? I may be cursed with a good memory but absolutely no "AI art" that my friends passed on to me looked original. In some cases it was painfully obvious what it's based on, in other cases it just felt like i've seen it before. Legal it may be (although there will be conflicts about machine generated derivative works) but it's also boring. People are just enthusiastic because it's "do it with a computer". If a young human artist came up with this stuff you'd tell them they're good technically but now they need to develop their own personality.
  - ShamelessC 4y ago
    It is more than capable of producing stuff that isn’t even in its dataset as the original DALLE paper shows. Inference takes 4 seconds on an A100, I’d say that makes it useful for a wide range of applications that weren’t even possible before. I do agree that the outputs will lack a sense of communication with the viewer that art has.
  - Ukv 4y ago
    > In some cases it was painfully obvious what it's based on Do you have an example of this? Ideally with a link (for DALL-E 2/Midjourney) or prompt and seed (for Stable Diffusion) to show that it was generated from an incidental prompt - as opposed to uploading the existing image and just using the AI for inpainting/fine-tuning.
    - nottorp 4y ago
      I don't keep the image spam from the group chats I'm on, sorry. Man or machine generated. There lies madness. But I definitely remember being shown something that was the submarine from the beatles album cover with different colours and ... something else that i forgot what it was ... pasted in. The text prompt included submarine but not beatles.
Nadya 4y ago
So is most real art. In fact - artists have even created a dedicated terms to this kind of plagiarism: "style study" or even "reference". You can look for this term on YouTube and find a nearly endless result of artists basing art off of the style of other artists. [0] It is 100% legal for me to blatantly copy the artistic style of Ilya Kuvshinov. I could even sell such work as my own - because it would be. I'd be seen as a derivative or knock-off artist but it can be done. As far as I can tell the real issue is that the AI does it far better - and much faster - than people can. Creating heavily derivative works that, if nonfamiliar with Kuvshinov's work, could possibly be mistaken as being theirs. That the AI has learned that artist signatures/watermarks are a "feature" of some artwork and so sometimes adds its own has only reinforced people's mistaken belief that it is stealing art when that simply isn't how neural networks like this work at all. Speaking of - how many people doing style studies of Ilya's work reached out for permission first? I'd wager zero. Because that isn't a thing artists tend to reach out and ask for permission to do. So why should an AI be expected to ask permission first? [0] Quite literally only to illustrate my point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrvZTeLP96E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrvZTeLP96E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DadJAu0Ogs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DadJAu0Ogs https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gc8DhwMZDKU https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gc8DhwMZDKU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U4RSCK-Tn0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U4RSCK-Tn0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPWOy7NxYho https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPWOy7NxYho https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nc--w5NfCM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nc--w5NfCM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0K3F9al2Js https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0K3F9al2Js https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5l8y1HZ1zc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5l8y1HZ1zc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDRS9im1q4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDRS9im1q4s https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4zBoHcIo4mc https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4zBoHcIo4mc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0cXa9WxFVQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0cXa9WxFVQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDhtkWRY9qk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDhtkWRY9qk
- ShamelessC 4y ago
  Interesting! I haven’t really seen this discussed elsewhere.
Double_a_92 4y ago
Isn't that how most art works in real life? Not every artist will create some completely new style. It's mostly combining bits of styles that you like.

Kiro 4y ago

And neither would constitute as plagiarism by the legal definition of it. Yes, it's a problem that they are trained on material without consent but what they produce is something totally new and not even close to plagiarism.

nottorp 4y ago
> what they produce is something totally new It is? I may be cursed with a good memory but absolutely no "AI art" that my friends passed on to me looked original. In some cases it was painfully obvious what it's based on, in other cases it just felt like i've seen it before. Legal it may be (although there will be conflicts about machine generated derivative works) but it's also boring. People are just enthusiastic because it's "do it with a computer". If a young human artist came up with this stuff you'd tell them they're good technically but now they need to develop their own personality.
- ShamelessC 4y ago
  It is more than capable of producing stuff that isn’t even in its dataset as the original DALLE paper shows. Inference takes 4 seconds on an A100, I’d say that makes it useful for a wide range of applications that weren’t even possible before. I do agree that the outputs will lack a sense of communication with the viewer that art has.
- Ukv 4y ago
  > In some cases it was painfully obvious what it's based on Do you have an example of this? Ideally with a link (for DALL-E 2/Midjourney) or prompt and seed (for Stable Diffusion) to show that it was generated from an incidental prompt - as opposed to uploading the existing image and just using the AI for inpainting/fine-tuning.
  - nottorp 4y ago
    I don't keep the image spam from the group chats I'm on, sorry. Man or machine generated. There lies madness. But I definitely remember being shown something that was the submarine from the beatles album cover with different colours and ... something else that i forgot what it was ... pasted in. The text prompt included submarine but not beatles.

Nadya 4y ago

So is most real art. In fact - artists have even created a dedicated terms to this kind of plagiarism: "style study" or even "reference". You can look for this term on YouTube and find a nearly endless result of artists basing art off of the style of other artists. [0] It is 100% legal for me to blatantly copy the artistic style of Ilya Kuvshinov. I could even sell such work as my own - because it would be. I'd be seen as a derivative or knock-off artist but it can be done. As far as I can tell the real issue is that the AI does it far better - and much faster - than people can. Creating heavily derivative works that, if nonfamiliar with Kuvshinov's work, could possibly be mistaken as being theirs. That the AI has learned that artist signatures/watermarks are a "feature" of some artwork and so sometimes adds its own has only reinforced people's mistaken belief that it is stealing art when that simply isn't how neural networks like this work at all. Speaking of - how many people doing style studies of Ilya's work reached out for permission first? I'd wager zero. Because that isn't a thing artists tend to reach out and ask for permission to do. So why should an AI be expected to ask permission first? [0] Quite literally only to illustrate my point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrvZTeLP96E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrvZTeLP96E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DadJAu0Ogs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DadJAu0Ogs https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gc8DhwMZDKU https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gc8DhwMZDKU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U4RSCK-Tn0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7U4RSCK-Tn0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPWOy7NxYho https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPWOy7NxYho https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nc--w5NfCM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nc--w5NfCM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0K3F9al2Js https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0K3F9al2Js https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5l8y1HZ1zc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5l8y1HZ1zc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDRS9im1q4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDRS9im1q4s https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4zBoHcIo4mc https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4zBoHcIo4mc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0cXa9WxFVQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0cXa9WxFVQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDhtkWRY9qk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDhtkWRY9qk

ShamelessC 4y ago
Interesting! I haven’t really seen this discussed elsewhere.

Double_a_92 4y ago

Isn't that how most art works in real life? Not every artist will create some completely new style. It's mostly combining bits of styles that you like.