My concern is not lobbying but the specific agenda of this group that uses crowdfunding to push for a blanket ban on all AI-related art. This approach pretty mu

My concern is not lobbying but the specific agenda of this group that uses crowdfunding to push for a blanket ban on all AI-related art. This approach pretty much bypasses the traditional process of open debates and public discourse around new technologies and their potential impact on society preventively out of fear. By using financial resources to hire a lobbyist and push for a ban, they effectively shuts down any meaningful discussion of the pros and cons of AI-generated art, as well as the potential impact of a ban on artists and businesses that depend on this technology. This approach is not only potentially detrimental to the development of the technology itself but it also undermines the principles of transparency and accountability in the political process. A lot of the content being published by such groups do not present the situation accurately but present AI-generated art as "collages" or tools that directly plagiarize or replicate the work of other artists. For example, Karla Ortiz (board member of the CAA, the group who is behind this GoFundMe) describes it as "it’s like someone who already robbed you [...]". More examples can be found on this website that adds commentary to the original lawsuit against "a 21st-century collage tool that violates the rights of artists": http://www.stablediffusionfrivolous.com/ http://www.stablediffusionfrivolous.com/ Lobbying in itself can be a legitimate form of political advocacy. The specific use of crowdfunding to push for a broad ban on any AI-related artistic generation is where I raise concerns.