3 ms·
Sounds like fair use to me, unless I’m mistaken… what could be wrong with replicating a style that someone else introduced? It’s entirely possible someone else
by luxuryballs 4y ago
Sounds like fair use to me, unless I’m mistaken… what could be wrong with replicating a style that someone else introduced? It’s entirely possible someone else came up with the same style hundreds of years before and it just never became well known. People copy various anime styles all the time, why can’t they use a computer program to help them do it?
Clearly the argument can’t just be “because they should hire someone to do it”, heck what if that person is totally booked? It’s not taking away from them in the slightest to produce additional artwork using a similar style if they weren’t available to take the job, so that seems irrelevant.
As long as you’re not taking their work and saying it’s yours or selling it I don’t see why you can’t mimic the style.
- mrtksn 4y agoIMHO the current laws and concepts don't work anymore, at all. Copyright laws were already very problematic and caused all kinds of troubles but what's happening now is well beyond all that. I also think that the use of AI is a fair game, the problem is that the thing itself is made possible by the hard work of thousands of people. By hard work, I mean years or even decades of development. They didn't learn to draw perfect photorealistic paintings, they developed styles and methods that capture something about humans and the machine took it from them.
- luxuryballs 4y agoI never learned a ton of math but I use computer chips that were designed by people with years of experience in engineering to do math for me.
- mrtksn 4y agoTrue, also they all got a salary and royalties for their work. They were well compensated and they continue being compensated. Have you heard of ARM Holdings? Its the British CPU design firm that designed all the CPUs in your phone and now in your macbooks. Apple and others continue paying them for their work they did in the 80s.
- ForestCritter 4y agoIf you have the skill to physically mimic my art, I see no problem. I am not a huge fan of copyright. AI does not have the physical skill to make art. It is entirely directed by human input and programming and relies on such to generate images that correlate to a human directed request. Computers are directed by code written for them by humans and rely on humans to input data. In this instance, programmers have written a program that feeds off of physically made art and generates statistical reiterations of the data that has been entered. Learning requires concious intellect. Actual physical art is being used, however much diluted, and capitalized on without the consent of the artist making the physical effort to create it.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- luxuryballs 4y agoI use computers to do things I don’t have the innate ability to do all the time, that’s what tools are for. If someone can present that an artifact I used in a commercial product is an asset directly taken from their portfolio then I’d graciously remove it.