5 ms·

IANAL but artistic style is not copyrightable. Many many human artists have created images and animated films in the style of Ghibli or Disney or Pixar and ther

IANAL but artistic style is not copyrightable. Many many human artists have created images and animated films in the style of Ghibli or Disney or Pixar and there's no direct copyright issue there.

iszomer 2y ago
Yeah but humans aren't exactly fast at replicating any particular art style.
- catach 2y ago
  Speed of replication isn't a part of copyright law, is it?
  - iszomer 2y ago
    Nope. But I do feel bad for partaking in part for Louis CK's Twitter-Jesus rant. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSSDeesUUsU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSSDeesUUsU
  - SirMaster 2y ago
    No, but I have to wonder if the reason it isn't is because up until now it was so slow and time consuming etc to create a replication.
- throwuxiytayq 2y ago
  Should I be concerned about my drawing speed lest it qualifies as copyright informant?
conartist6 2y ago
Maaybe, but you'd also have to pass the three-prong test of fair use, and one of the prongs of the test is that your fair use of the material can't eliminate the market for the original material. I fail to see how taking a distinctive artistic style that was incredibly difficult to produce and shitting out massive amounts of it everywhere as a super low quality commodity would pass the test of fair use.
- gruez 2y ago
  >Maaybe, but you'd also have to pass the three-prong test of fair use, and one of the prongs of the test is that your fair use of the material can't eliminate the market for the original material. "artistic style" is outright not copyrightable. Fair use doesn't play into it, any more than fair use doesn't play into whether a photo taken by a monkey can be redistributed[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput...
  - conartist6 2y ago
    It isn't the distribution here that's the usage, it's training the model. If I take a copyrighted work and train a model with it and there's no longer any demand for the original, training the model was not a fair use
user432678 2y ago
A friend of mine tried to create stock illustrations in Disney style on Etsy, got banned almost immediately for copyright infringement. I guess it depends.
- vikingerik 2y ago
  Etsy as a private platform banning it doesn't necessarily mean it was actually legally infringing. Like all the content hosting platforms, they would err super cautiously to avoid any possibility of anything even remotely resembling any legal case, even if they would virtually certainly be in the clear.
- graemep 2y ago
  Did your friend describe it as "Disney style"? In that case there would be a trademark infringement. Also, Disney have deep pockets and Etsy would not want to argue it out with them if they got a complaint.
jmount 2y ago
It is complicated. Tom Waits won a case where a commercial imitated his style.
- fenomas 2y ago
  > Tom Waits won a case where a commercial imitated his style. Not under US copyright law, AFAICT. He's won cases where he sued over things like false endorsement - i.e. claiming that listeners would believe it was actually him, not just that the style was similar. (Apparently he did win a similar case in Spain under their copyright law, but from skimming articles it sounds like the issue there also was impersonation, not just stylistic similarity.)
- spot 2y ago
  the laws for music are different & much stricter than images.
pera 2y ago
It's not about the style and it's a mistake to perceive generative AI models as analogues of human artists: - When does generative AI qualify for fair use?: https://suchir.net/fair_use.html https://suchir.net/fair_use.html - AI is currently just glorified compression: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38399753 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38399753

IANAL but artistic style is not copyrightable. Many many human artists have created images and animated films in the style of Ghibli or Disney or Pixar and there's no direct copyright issue there.

iszomer 2y ago

Yeah but humans aren't exactly fast at replicating any particular art style.

catach 2y ago
Speed of replication isn't a part of copyright law, is it?
- iszomer 2y ago
  Nope. But I do feel bad for partaking in part for Louis CK's Twitter-Jesus rant. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSSDeesUUsU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSSDeesUUsU
- SirMaster 2y ago
  No, but I have to wonder if the reason it isn't is because up until now it was so slow and time consuming etc to create a replication.
throwuxiytayq 2y ago
Should I be concerned about my drawing speed lest it qualifies as copyright informant?

conartist6 2y ago

Maaybe, but you'd also have to pass the three-prong test of fair use, and one of the prongs of the test is that your fair use of the material can't eliminate the market for the original material. I fail to see how taking a distinctive artistic style that was incredibly difficult to produce and shitting out massive amounts of it everywhere as a super low quality commodity would pass the test of fair use.

gruez 2y ago
>Maaybe, but you'd also have to pass the three-prong test of fair use, and one of the prongs of the test is that your fair use of the material can't eliminate the market for the original material. "artistic style" is outright not copyrightable. Fair use doesn't play into it, any more than fair use doesn't play into whether a photo taken by a monkey can be redistributed[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput...
- conartist6 2y ago
  It isn't the distribution here that's the usage, it's training the model. If I take a copyrighted work and train a model with it and there's no longer any demand for the original, training the model was not a fair use

user432678 2y ago

A friend of mine tried to create stock illustrations in Disney style on Etsy, got banned almost immediately for copyright infringement. I guess it depends.

vikingerik 2y ago
Etsy as a private platform banning it doesn't necessarily mean it was actually legally infringing. Like all the content hosting platforms, they would err super cautiously to avoid any possibility of anything even remotely resembling any legal case, even if they would virtually certainly be in the clear.
graemep 2y ago
Did your friend describe it as "Disney style"? In that case there would be a trademark infringement. Also, Disney have deep pockets and Etsy would not want to argue it out with them if they got a complaint.

jmount 2y ago

It is complicated. Tom Waits won a case where a commercial imitated his style.

fenomas 2y ago
> Tom Waits won a case where a commercial imitated his style. Not under US copyright law, AFAICT. He's won cases where he sued over things like false endorsement - i.e. claiming that listeners would believe it was actually him, not just that the style was similar. (Apparently he did win a similar case in Spain under their copyright law, but from skimming articles it sounds like the issue there also was impersonation, not just stylistic similarity.)
spot 2y ago
the laws for music are different & much stricter than images.

pera 2y ago

It's not about the style and it's a mistake to perceive generative AI models as analogues of human artists: - When does generative AI qualify for fair use?: https://suchir.net/fair_use.html https://suchir.net/fair_use.html - AI is currently just glorified compression: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38399753 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38399753