5 ms·

Saw this post a few days ago on Reddit about their game getting rejected by Steam (the main platform studios publish their games on for PC) for falsely detectin

Saw this post a few days ago on Reddit about their game getting rejected by Steam (the main platform studios publish their games on for PC) for falsely detecting A.I. assets. A few people in the comments chimed in and said they had similar experiences as well: "We are a small indie studio publishing our first game on Steam. Today we got hit with the dreaded message "Your app appears to contain art assets generated by artificial intelligence that may be relying on copyrighted material owned by third parties" review from the Steam team - even though we have no AI assets at all and all of our assets were hand drawn/sculpted by our artists."[1] https://old.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/16bcj4a/first_indie_game_on_steam_failed_on_build_review/ https://old.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/16bcj4a/first_indi...

muzani 3y ago
Interesting, didn't realize Steam was banning AI art. That sounds like a very difficult policy to enforce too. If it's manually approved, it can be difficult, though there are signs like characters keeping their hands in their pockets. If it's AI checked, that sounds like using thieves to catch the thief.
- cableshaft 3y ago
  Almost certain it's the latter. Pretty much all of these large companies start with A.I. detection then manually review when appealed (if they bother to with the appeal at all).
yieldcrv 3y ago
On that note, given that AI assets have no copyright protection, how would one prove they are AI assets if they wanted to take royalty free, or conversely prove its not AI
- cableshaft 3y ago
  Top comment explained how another person appealed it, but I don't think everyone could do this: "I ran into the same issue as well making a visual novel. All I had to do was show them proof that we made those assets - character sketches, color roughs, unrendered 3D assets and mention the artist names and they approved it within a few days. My advice is make it as easy as possible for them."
- JohnFen 3y ago
  I think that if you're the one who created the asset, proving that would be relatively easy. The asset didn't come fully formed on first blush, so all you'd need to do is show the incremental work that led to the final asset.
  - scarmig 3y ago
    It's only a matter of time until models can create that trail of incremental work, though.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      In the same sense that people can do it, sure, but it's not all that easy. You have to go back and fake all sorts of timestamps, email exchanges, handwritten notes, etc. AI doesn't make doing that any easier, and it's often not that hard to detect fraudulent records. The amount of stuff you'd have to fake, both electronic and physical, makes doing so successfully a nontrivial exercise and -- if you're found out -- turns it into a much larger, potentially criminal, case of fraud.
  - PeterStuer 3y ago
    Guilty until proven innocent?
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      It's not a guilty vs innocent thing. It's a proof of provenance thing. It's not even remotely new. If you're in a patent or copyright dispute, being able to "show your work" has always been the strongest way to demonstrate provenance in court.
Quinzel 3y ago
I Seen something similar on here the other day where someone had their game rejected because of AI. I actually naïvely thought that having AI in a game would be advantageous because it could be used to make the game a more personalised experience. I don’t know anything about game development so… so my thoughts are actually irrelevant

muzani 3y ago

Interesting, didn't realize Steam was banning AI art. That sounds like a very difficult policy to enforce too. If it's manually approved, it can be difficult, though there are signs like characters keeping their hands in their pockets. If it's AI checked, that sounds like using thieves to catch the thief.

cableshaft 3y ago
Almost certain it's the latter. Pretty much all of these large companies start with A.I. detection then manually review when appealed (if they bother to with the appeal at all).

yieldcrv 3y ago

On that note, given that AI assets have no copyright protection, how would one prove they are AI assets if they wanted to take royalty free, or conversely prove its not AI

cableshaft 3y ago
Top comment explained how another person appealed it, but I don't think everyone could do this: "I ran into the same issue as well making a visual novel. All I had to do was show them proof that we made those assets - character sketches, color roughs, unrendered 3D assets and mention the artist names and they approved it within a few days. My advice is make it as easy as possible for them."
JohnFen 3y ago
I think that if you're the one who created the asset, proving that would be relatively easy. The asset didn't come fully formed on first blush, so all you'd need to do is show the incremental work that led to the final asset.
- scarmig 3y ago
  It's only a matter of time until models can create that trail of incremental work, though.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    In the same sense that people can do it, sure, but it's not all that easy. You have to go back and fake all sorts of timestamps, email exchanges, handwritten notes, etc. AI doesn't make doing that any easier, and it's often not that hard to detect fraudulent records. The amount of stuff you'd have to fake, both electronic and physical, makes doing so successfully a nontrivial exercise and -- if you're found out -- turns it into a much larger, potentially criminal, case of fraud.
- PeterStuer 3y ago
  Guilty until proven innocent?
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    It's not a guilty vs innocent thing. It's a proof of provenance thing. It's not even remotely new. If you're in a patent or copyright dispute, being able to "show your work" has always been the strongest way to demonstrate provenance in court.

Quinzel 3y ago

I Seen something similar on here the other day where someone had their game rejected because of AI. I actually naïvely thought that having AI in a game would be advantageous because it could be used to make the game a more personalised experience. I don’t know anything about game development so… so my thoughts are actually irrelevant