4 ms·

It's strange though because if you know anything about Disney and how the manage the characters in media and at the parks, they are extremely protective of the

by jeffwask 10mo ago

It's strange though because if you know anything about Disney and how the manage the characters in media and at the parks, they are extremely protective of the brand and image of the characters. Imagineers have very strict rules around virtual character meet and greets and etc. Allowing their characters to be used in AI generated content blows that all out of the water unless there are some extremely tight guard rails. They are a half step from flooding the market with Disney Princess porn.

NewsaHackO 10mo ago
I guess there is an expectation of a lack of control when it’s made through AI, versus an image that is from their owned parks. Even without AI, people have been putting Disney characters in unsavory contextes, and I don’t think anyone ever thought, “Wow, I can’t believe Disney sanctioned that picture of a princess doing whatever.”
- jeffwask 10mo ago
  Yes, but Disney legal is incredibly aggressive with any unauthorized use of characters. They have made day care's repaint walls with character murals. They have an army that chases that stuff down.
  - ryandrake 10mo ago
    Which is why it's so weird that they are seemingly doing a 180 if it involves "AI". The biggest actual impact of the AI craze has been the extent to which mere mention of it is causing businesses to upend themselves and break with decades of historical behavior.
- optimalsolver 10mo ago
  *contexts
ossner 10mo ago
Yes, that is certainly true, but I think there is a certain monetary value attached to that virality that Disney now wants to cash in on, which is something they haven't done before. There's also the outward plausible deniability of "well we couldn't have known that people would break the guard rails". I can't imagine any other explanation. This decision must have gone through a lot of channels and they must be aware what these characters will be used for.
- rhetocj23 10mo ago
  [dead]
squigz 10mo ago
> They are a half step from flooding the market with Disney Princess porn. I would think that whatever demand there is for that is already filled.
- buellerbueller 10mo ago
  rule 34 would strongly suggest that is not the case.
  - squigz 10mo ago
    Rule 34 suggests there is demand, yes. The various rule 34 commision artists suggests there is supply. I was mostly making a joke, as the idea of this deal causing a load of Disney princess porn to pop up and causing a sudden surge in people into that is hilarious to me.

NewsaHackO 10mo ago

I guess there is an expectation of a lack of control when it’s made through AI, versus an image that is from their owned parks. Even without AI, people have been putting Disney characters in unsavory contextes, and I don’t think anyone ever thought, “Wow, I can’t believe Disney sanctioned that picture of a princess doing whatever.”

jeffwask 10mo ago
Yes, but Disney legal is incredibly aggressive with any unauthorized use of characters. They have made day care's repaint walls with character murals. They have an army that chases that stuff down.
- ryandrake 10mo ago
  Which is why it's so weird that they are seemingly doing a 180 if it involves "AI". The biggest actual impact of the AI craze has been the extent to which mere mention of it is causing businesses to upend themselves and break with decades of historical behavior.
optimalsolver 10mo ago
*contexts

ossner 10mo ago

Yes, that is certainly true, but I think there is a certain monetary value attached to that virality that Disney now wants to cash in on, which is something they haven't done before. There's also the outward plausible deniability of "well we couldn't have known that people would break the guard rails". I can't imagine any other explanation. This decision must have gone through a lot of channels and they must be aware what these characters will be used for.

rhetocj23 10mo ago
[dead]

squigz 10mo ago

> They are a half step from flooding the market with Disney Princess porn. I would think that whatever demand there is for that is already filled.

buellerbueller 10mo ago
rule 34 would strongly suggest that is not the case.
- squigz 10mo ago
  Rule 34 suggests there is demand, yes. The various rule 34 commision artists suggests there is supply. I was mostly making a joke, as the idea of this deal causing a load of Disney princess porn to pop up and causing a sudden surge in people into that is hilarious to me.