Inspiration... or stealing?
Image-generating AI “learns” from databases of artwork that already exists.
This means it can create images in the style of the human artists that it learns from.
For example, here is a “painting”, created by AI, of a Topical Talker reading the newspaper, in the style of Vincent van Gogh.
Artists were not asked permission before their work was put into AI databases.
Some artists may be unaware that their work was used.
While some people think that this is OK, others have said that they think it is unfair that AI can use another artist’s style without permission.
We want to know your opinion!
- Do you think AI should be able to copy other artists’ styles? Why or why not?
- How would you feel if someone closely copied something you had made? Excited? Honoured? Flattered? Or maybe angry?
- Should any rules be put in place for AI-generated art?
Let us know in the comments below!
Comments (155)
It is of utmost importance to show reverence for the intellectual property rights of artists and avoid duplication or reproduction of their creative works without prior consent. The act could potentially infringe upon an artist's rightful ownership and hard work that went into creating their unique art. Therefore, it is imperative always to seek permission and give proper credit where due in order to maintain fairness and respect within the creative industry. I would feel greatly privileged if a request was made to obtain my permission prior to reproducing any of my work. Such an opportunity would enable me to share my creations with a wider audience, resulting in an increased level of recognition and appreciation for my efforts. It is imperative to implement regulations that govern the utilization of artificial intelligence. The laws should cover various aspects of AI, such as its development, deployment, and use, to ensure that it is utilized in a responsible and ethical manner.
1) Obtaining the consent of artists before reproducing their artwork.
2) Important to acknowledge and give credit to the artists.
3) Replicating the style of other artists should be made illegal.
I agree because...
from my point of view ::
I completely agree with the three points mentioned. We should all respect the intellectual property rights of artists and not reproduce their artwork without their prior consent. We should also give proper recognition to the artists and give them the credit they deserve when using their artwork. Finally, copying the style of other artists should be illegal as it is a violation of intellectual and creative property rights. Respecting these legal and ethical practices respects the rights of artists and helps build a more appreciated and respected creative industry.
I agree with you, and I want to add that the pattern is copied with consent, of course, but in a different way or with more details, or if he wants to reproduce it more, the credit must be given to the artists in order to avoid theft, deception and counterfeiting
i agree with what you have said if AI is allowed to copy allowed to copy other artist the would be invading in their privacy and it would them feel annoyed that the they spent their time doing something and another person is copying their work.
I did not think about it these way but you have made me to think about AI from a different perspective.
I agree because I feel it's essential to show reverence for the intelligent property requests of artists and avoid replicating or imitating their creative works without their initial license. I strongly believe replicating an artist's work without permission can potentially disregard their appropriate consent and the hard work that went into creating their unique art. Therefore, seeking permission and giving proper recognition where due is essential to maintain justice and respect within the creative endeavor. I also agree that cultivating an artist's permission prior to reproducing their work is a privilege and an opportunity for the artist to share their creations with a wider audience. This can result in increased recognition and appreciation for their grinds, which is essential for any artist to flourish.
I agree with you that certain rules should be issued in this regard to maintain artists' right. Today I was astonished that one of the singers give a permission to anyone to use her voice via AI, but half of the profit should back to her.
I agree with you, but artists love the field of art because of the presence of a specific person (artist) who loved his art and wanted to become like him, so he became an artist and followed his method in art and took lessons from it.
I strongly agree with you trusting _theory , because The name artificial intelligence,has already proven that it can not generate new ideas on it own,but it can support human by making use of human creation. So why should Ai produce art.
There are so many things Ai can do, it can be used in the hospital,place of work, school,house. So why should Ai be used in production of art,when their alot of things it can be used for , to make human more creative.
Ai will make human artist less important , because with the use of Ai so many artist Will loss their job because it serves as a source of income to them.
We need to economize, especially in my country, having people making use of Ai instead of human creation will cost alot of money,when these same money can be used for relevant things.
Most people will prefer Ai to human creation because it will be more easy and accurate.
But it will be wise of us to produce with little or no capital. making use of human creation will save us a lot.
Well I don't think the Ai will be able to carve out art work,it take a human creativity for Ai to work.
With the use of Ai , most artist will stop creating,and art will go into extinction.sotherefore Ai should not be allowed to copy other artists work.
From my point of view, I agree with what you are saying, because with the development of modern science and technology, especially artificial intelligence, there has been theft of ideas and their dissemination from artificial intelligence, and also that, from my point of view, there is a problem because intelligence Artificial art hides the creativity of artists, but on the other hand, if we look back, there are those who violate the copyrights of many artists. But there are suggestions that can benefit artists and preserve their artistic paintings, and I have seen many artists use this method, which is to create a separate page in which the artist shows his creativity in drawing, but on the condition that he shows himself So that theft or fraud does not happen in the name of other pages
I agree because its the artist work and the AI is just copying it and making it look different to the original piece so i agree that replicating the style of other artists should be made illegal. You made a good point in the paragraph
You have made good points but I don't agree with you,fully due to it not being a direct copy.Only using a style of an artist.Replicating the style is almost harmless because real artists use that method to get inspiration this inspiration is made using that artists style.
They must bear these burdens, because intellectual property has also been stolen during invention, and we are accustomed to the situation that even those who are artists should not care. Thought, of course, is the greatest gift and much greater than art,If there is no thought of where they came from art and creativity؟
Do you think AI should be able to copy other artists' styles? The AI is programmed to obey the person's wishes hence when they are asked to draw a picture in the style of Vincent Van Gogh, they will do so. In the economist under the topic ' A battle royal is brewing over copyright and AI' , australian singer-songwriter Nick Cave stated after telling the AI to write a song in his style, ' This song sucks. Writing a good song is not mimicry, or replication, or pastiche, it is the opposite. It is an act of self-murder that destroys all one has strived to produce in the past.' And even for other subjects within the classroom, children need to expand their creativiy and imaginative boundaries rather than following the AI. Personally, I believe that copying or plagiarising a person's ideas is not appropriate if you do not have their permission to do so and their should be an age limit to who uses the AI and who does not.
How would you feel if someone closely copied something you made? Let us all be honest. Everyone feels a hint of annnoyance that someone has copied an exact line in writing you created. Many people, even my friends, copy my writing but when they ASK PERMISSION, I feel proud that they like my idea so much, they would implement it in their own writing. However, some people in my class, choose to edit my work, when in reality, they choose to just say everything is fine with it and they just copy my ideas. I am not ok with this. That is stealing ideas not copying. A person has no right to steal someone's ideas without them knowing because, frankly, that seems to me like theft.
Should any rules be put in place for AI-generated art? Before all of the art images should be put into the AI's system, people that have produced this art should be asked if this can be uploaded on the AI thus used by other people. That is a perfect system where people's ideas are not stolen. When I an annoyed that someone copies my work, my mum says that I should feel honoured because they look up to me like a role model. And indeed, I am proud of that.
I agree with all of your points, especially your point about permission. I think that AI art is a very volatile concept and that to help it improve it does need human interaction. If people were to just give it permission to use their work I think it would be better for the AI and humans. As you mentioned, artists are having their work put in AI databases without their permission, and this is only going to cause the hate for AI to grow and the harm against human livelihoods to grow as well. You made a very good comment and I enjoyed reading all of the points you made.
I believe AI should not be allowed to copy other people's art. Whether the software uses generative adversarial networks or diffusion models, an AI art generator learns from existing images, videos, and so on, all of which come from the internet. The AI’s programmer can just take this data and feed it into their engine without telling the original owners. Some people end up seeing artworks that look like theirs that they never created. AI art generators should seek out willing participants who have agreed for that their art can be used to improve machine learning.
It is also a threat to the artist's job . According to deccanherald.com Rutkowski who was an artist had his work mimicked and since the AI copy came out, Rutkowski said he has received far fewer requests from first-time authors who need covers for their fantasy novels. His work was copied without his permission which must have angered him and due to it he was slowly losing his business.
To prevent this, artists who don't want their work to be copied should watermark them. A watermark is an image or mark on a piece of art which is visible when viewed by transmitted light. Watermarks can potentially confuse AI training sets. While small logos or text will have little effect, larger overlaid patterns can seriously affect an AI's ability to use it for training in a number of ways. If the pattern is too complex or visually similar to the underlying artwork, it may confuse the AI system and cause it to make incorrect predictions or decisions. In some cases, the pattern may even be misinterpreted as part of the content of the image. This would prevent an AI from copying it.
Hello!
Well, I like your views and opinions and I think we share similar views and opinions but when you say your mum tells you that you should feel honored, I don't think everyone shares the same opinion with you and your mum. Imagine a scenario where you create something, and it doesn't get recognized and someone else does the exact thing and gets recognized for your work and doesn't even give you credit. I think there should definitely be rules put in place for AI generated art as rules create law and order. I think rules like AI should be authorized by creators if they want to replicate their art and people who use AI should be licensed and in the vase of children either supervised or there should be an age limit to usage of AI.
All in all, AI is a good thing that I think should be allowed but when misused or regulated could have negative effects.
I disagree with the idea the AI should be allowed to copy artists' styles because Artificial Intelligence has been applying in basic ways for a while, such as some artists using models to draw as references . AI produces art that causes a threat to artists as it may use other artists work without permission , credit or compensation to generate the art the artists desires.
Great point! do you think there can be a way around this if AI was to get permission from artists?
YES, I think the AI can permission from artists by leaving the artist's signature at the end of the drawing so that the artist knows that his/ her art is being used and not stolen. The AI can also get permission from the artist by giving
the artist little credit or compensation for Inspiration.
How might AI give compensation, eloquent_fly? That's an interesting idea.
I believe that the copyright laws should should not be violated because, these artists took their time to either write or design the art works for the entertainment of people. Even when the AI wants to make use of the art works, compensations should be given to the artists and can be in form of money, and public recognition and so on
I am of the opinion that artistes could be compensated by AI platforms or applications via the avenue of monetization. This could be done by encouraging artistes to sell their concept, where there could be a split with the revenue generated. For instance, the artiste could get a 70%, while the AI platform gets 30%, respectively.
In addition, they ought to ensure that credit is given to the creators of such art concepts.
I completely agree with you that the creators of such art should be compensated. This will, in some ways, make the person whose work was copied happy that his efforts were not in vain. It is important to understand that many people are disappointed to learn that their work was used and that nothing was returned to them. They are emotionally and mentally exhausted.
I disagree with you because I totally think AI should be able to copy other artists' styles. Hear me out - imitation is like the first step to creating something new, ya know? And if AI can explore different styles, it can like totally expand its own artistic abilities. Plus, it could help preserve old-school artistic traditions that might otherwise be lost. But, like, there are some legit concerns to think about. Like, who owns the rights to an artist's style? And what happens when AI gets so advanced that it can copy entire works? We gotta be real and figure out some ethical solutions as AI keeps evolving and changing the game.
I think AI should be able to copy other artists styles because AI can help produce more artists that may someday change the world and if I was an artist I would be honoured to get my art style to be put into the AI.
Although I think that there should be some rules put on the AI generated arts.
For example:
All arts created by the AI can not be used to win awards.
Good way to look at this! do you think there can be a different award ceremony for AI generated art only?
Yes, I do think that there could be a different award specifically for the AI generated arts but I think that the AI generated arts award should be a minor award compared to arts generated by humans. But if humans continue to rely on the AI there could be some negative effects on humans.
For example:
This could lead to less opportunities and income for human artists.
The criteria for such an award ceremony would need to be carefully considered. How would the judges assess the quality of AI-generated art compared to human-created art? Would there be different categories for different types of AI-generated art, such as music, visual art, or literature?
Another question that would need to be addressed is whether AI-generated art truly deserves its own award ceremony. After all, it could be argued that AI is simply a tool used by human creators to enhance their artistic vision, rather than being a creator in its own right.
I disagree because some people make money out of those art and some may not like it if their art idea is taken without their consent...
I didn't like your suggestion because you took the wrong look at the topic. For example, you said if you were an artist, you would have the AI determine your artistic style. This is a good step, but artificial intelligence can refuse or cancel your ownership so that it becomes the property of the artificial intelligence program, and it can change the drawing of the painting, for example, change its meaning and put it under the ownership of your name because this will turn against you because artificial intelligence cannot deal with it in these matters. In my opinion, this matter will have serious consequences.
I do not think that artificial intelligence should imitate artists' styles in their drawing, because each person has his own style, and has his own talent, so we should not steal it so that the painter does not get frustrated and says that there is someone who can imitate and draw what I draw, but rather we must develop his skills And to make it more and more unique.
As for me, I do not like someone imitating what I do, whether it is drawing or something else, because it makes me jealous and obliterates my ambitions that I used to dream about, and I talk to him about this thing because he works to rob the talents of others. Among the laws that must be available with artificial intelligence: Maintaining the security of the information of the person who uses it - keeping the graphics that are created on it - not imitating the methods of famous artists
Some might say that it takes inspiration from others which lots of people do. What do you think about that?
I agree because
Indeed, it may be an inspiration to others. In the end, the artificial intelligence device does not do the work on its own, but rather another artist programs the commands, and the device executes.
This artist may have liked the paintings of another artist and his way of drawing, so he wanted to take it as an example for him and to follow this method, develop it and innovate from it. Therefore, the artist should feel proud of that because he represents a source of inspiration for others
Well, I agree with you on this, but there is a big difference between being inspired and stealing a painting, or let's call it copying a painting, right??! I am sure that if the intention of the user was to draw inspiration from the painting, the owner of the painting would not object to this, but if his intention was to steal or copy the painting, wouldn’t this be theft of the other artist’s painting? Love it and be creative with it.
Yes, of course.. There are a few people who know that artificial intelligence is just art, but it also cannot work by itself, meaning that there are responsible people on this site, and the best example is artists. Here, artists have a great position that we are proud of and cherish because they made something people did not know Whether it works by itself or not, artificial intelligence has become a way to inspire others .
I agree with you on this point, as among them there are many outstanding artists who were inspired by the ideas and drawings of other artists. For example, there is Frank Brangwen, one of the first British admirers of Van Gogh. He painted a sunflower unit with some additions from it, but it was inspired by Van Gogh's paintings. But not every painting we can say is an inspiration, so the painting must have an impression of the artist as well, as well as the painting from which it was inspired, making sure that the person who painted it put effort into it and put his talent and ideas into it. Therefore, the person who was inspired by the painting must say that he was inspired by the painting of so-and-so, so that this person feels the importance of his drawing and the continuity of his talent in this matter. For example, if a painting similar to your painting is drawn in the same style as your painting,What would you feel? I think you would feel disappointed?
Artificial intelligence is really a source of inspiration for others. Artificial intelligence is just a site, but it does not do the work itself. Rather, it is a person behind these devices, and they are responsible and control these devices. The truth is that artists are a source of pride for me and some people, and we cherish them because they do things and ideas No one could do it unless it was copying or stealing a painting .
1I agree because... It is okay because Artificial intelligence can replicate an artist artwork in seconds and this could generate new ideas ,these creations could draw the emotions in the picture and give ideas for further expression of the art work.
2 I would be Honoured for my paintings to be done in another style of the modern technology.
3 Yes, this could stop the AI -generated art from displaying your painting styles in a bad way and using it without permission which could be unfair to the artist.
Well to me AI in this aspect is just in the middle of it all in my opinion because as serving a good purpose everything that has an advantage has a disadvantage; in the matter with that of inspiration ,well it does give the artist a more easier platform to make artworks but to me it removes the passion or true feeling of an artwork piece , because like they say art is expressing your innermost feelings but in this case will it be really you expressing your feelings or something helping you do it? . Now in form of stealing I am not trying to be negative but I think AI filches the idea renowned artists, well to me since it is artificial intelligence it should create its own style of art instead of sometimes imitating other artist work because to me it takes out the originality of the style. So as much as some of the artist and people think well maybe it expands their horizon it may not do that much maybe they only look towards the importance it attracts.
Your comment got me thinking - who is to blame if AI filches other people's ideas? AI itself, or the person who uses AI to copy someone else's work?
Well to me it is the person who uses AI to copy someone else's work that is at fault because like i have mentioned a lot of times in some of my previous comments, it doesn't have a mind of its own the use of AI is controlled by human beings and so whatever is going on in their own mind is then practiced with AI, so concerning who is to blame for filching of other people's ideas it is obviously human beings without conscience that the decide to use a thing meant to help humankind and the world itself for the wrong purpose of imposing other people ideas worked for sometimes knowing the consequences like being sued but still do it anyway.
Sometimes, the AI system may be solely responsible. In other cases, the humans who created or are using the AI system may be partially or fully responsible. Determining who's responsible for an AI mistake can be difficult, and it may require legal experts to determine liability on a case-by-case basis.
AI may make the right decisions based on facts, but may lack the empathy that needs to be part of those decisions. We still need humans in the middle to assess the value of insights and decisions to the welfare of humans, businesses and communities.Just like humans, AI systems can make mistakes.
According to chrome, "Experts say AI systems mainly make mistakes when real-world situations differ from the situations used in creating the intelligence. In FICO's case, it said its software expected more in-person than online shopping. This led the system to identify a greater share of financial activity as problematic. The law provides that such works will be owned by a human or corporate person, but the computer program or AI itself can never be the author or owner of the IP."
Honestly, i feel the idea of AI being responsible for filching\purloining other people's idea is not true.AI art-making models are a tool and it is within the hands of the user to either use them ethically or unethically. We all know that it is human beings that have the ability to control the use of AI, so i feel the blame should go to the person who uses AI to copy someone else's work.
In my own perspective I think it's the person who uses Al to copy someone else's work.
Let's take this illustration u were asked to attend an event but due to unplanned circumstances,you were unable to attend,so you sent your assistance when they want to take account of who was present,they won't write down your assistance name but yours.
So just like Al , when it copy someone else's work,the person's at fault is the person who created it because it's the person that programmed its to do that way
It is undoubtedly the fault of the person who uses AI to copy someone else's artwork because, First of all, AI doesn't have a mind of its own, like reliable orchard said, no matter how hard anyone wants to believe it. It's just advanced technology designed to help us perform tasks better. Artificial Intelligence doesn't decide to copy art, it is used by a HUMAN to copy it.
Second of all, Artificial Intelligence wasn't just created for art purposes. It has a lot other uses too, such as performing any task it is given, really. AI is a great gift to mankind, if we use it properly and within social and legal boundaries.
Blaming AI for copying at would be like blaming a dog who was told by its master to bark, for barking. You can't blame it, it was just following orders, and it doesn't have the capability to reason for and by itself.
Yes, in my own opinion the fact AI can copy art styles of artists is good serves as inspiration for upcoming artist and also serve as reference for the new artist giving them ideas and also serving as guideline to them. Using AI to create art with other people s style is not stealing in my opinion especially because you get the chance to manipulate it and add your own ideas to it or designs for me itis a huge source of inspiration. It becomes stealing when u don't change or add anything to the work and just claim it as yours. I also feel AI should take permission from artist before using their work or setting it as a platform for "Art inspiration" on their source for art. To avoid any issues and problems, rules should be set based on the use of any artwork, this way people will be able to use AI for art without allegedly "stealing" anyone's work.
If AI can produce any and all art, will there be space for people?
Firstly In my opinion AI can't create all art. Art is a form of self expression so new ideas can not be expressed by a non living thing. AI does not have a mind of its own It designs based on what it is programmed to do, or based on the information in its database. AI is used by most artist to achieve the best result with the help of a computer. The ideas of renovation or transformation of art are from the mind of the artist. I think the best way to rephrase your statement is "If AI can modify or design any form of art, Will there be need for plain artists? And I feel yes, There will still be need for Artist for will create new ideas, versions, forms of music to be programmed into AI so any artist will be able to work on it. Yes there will be space for people, Even more artist will be needed. The meta verse is expanding rapidly when an artist produces something with AI everyone will be rushing to it online. It will fade quickly too, therefore there will be need for more people to produce more illumination for the world of art
It is possible that there will be space for some people with strong determination, but also this will affect many artists and frustrate them and make them the ones who trust their work and not be expelled from it because this is really frustrating and sad and some of them may say: “Why am I here? There is no longer room for me in this place." Some of them also say: "I have to find another place to go to or another subject that I love. I no longer have a place here." In my opinion, it is really unfortunate to hear this from those who loved this field and excelled in it.
No, AI apps are unlikely to replace artists. While AI technology has made significant progress in generating visual and audio content, it still lacks the creativity and human touch that is intrinsic to art.AI algorithms can only generate images based on the data they have been trained on, meaning that they can only produce images that are similar to what they have seen before. Additionally, AI art lacks the emotional connection and personal touch that human art has, making it less meaningful and less impactful. While it is always possible that unforeseen events or developments could lead to the destruction of humans by AI, it is unlikely to happen in the near future. The processing of data and commands is essential to the operation of AI-powered devices. When it comes to speed, humans are no match for artificial intelligence or robots. Recently developed artificial intelligence (AI) models are capable of many impressive feats, including recognising images and producing human-like language. But just because AI can perform human-like behaviours doesn't mean it can think or understand like humans.
If the AI was to produce art 🎨 I think there will be space for human artists because, though the AI can create there own art, artist express there arts through emotions, inspiration and imagination real life experiences and more importantly human associations and culture and that AI does not have. AI can steal other artist's ideas and styles and claims as their own but artists get their ideas and styles through observing everything around them or pouring their emotions and pains into their artwork so that people can feel their work and that's what's AI can't steal.
"The AI generated art itself is probably not stealing from artists. However, the bigger question is if the creators of the AI stole from artists when they copied and exploited the works of millions of living artists without consideration or compensation. Copied?"
According to the research I've made so far, the AI doesn't actually have a mind of its own... It actually works based on what it is commanded or designed to do. And it could also be seen as piracy only when it happens that the AI didn't ask for the original copy artist's permission.
In my opinion, I would also say that it allows for fraud. For example, lets say the "Mona Lisa" artwork was being copied/pirated without anyone's knowledge, the individual who isn't aware/was never aware is capable of purchasing the pirated artwork without knowing that its a fake.
And also, I myself wouldn't like if my work was being copied because due to the fact that I took my time and put in effort to create it then a commoner or an individual out of the blues would just copy it.... I won't actually feel good about it. I would also be likably pissed off.
You've picked up on a good point here, agreeable_language. If AI cannot think for itself, who is responsible for stealing other artists's ideas? How do you stop them?
This is a very hard question to ask considering the fact that AI is a big part of human life right now so what restriction will be given in order for there to be extreme reduction of crimes committed with AI and still make sure it doesn't hinder the activities that humans use it for in their daily lives . But as of now there is no regulatory framework at the moment which targets AI-crimes , so there is no definite way to stopping them and so it will be extremely difficult and for who are responsible for the stealing of other artists it is clearly humans who have a mindset that is unacceptable . But even though AI is used as a means of wrong doing it can still be the solution to a problem caused by or with it , considering the technology it holds it could be used to solve these problems; a way that we can stop AI from stealing art is through glaze,It is a tool that can help artists protect their work from AI art generators. The app works by applying elusive changes to the artwork, changes so minor that they're barely perceptible to humans, this can easily confuse AI software. There are other many ways that this problem can be solved but this is my own little discovery.
I agree that AI cannot think for itself; however, I believe that the individual who operates the device is responsible. You can see it in our daily activities when ideas are stolen from one establishment to another, from one society to another, and from one country to another, and there is usually nothing that can be done about it. The theft of ideas leads to frustration, hostile behaviour, and low productivity.
To stop stealing, people can collaborate, work together to generate new ideas, and I believe that all of our ideologies need to change; we need to start making amends and not use other people's work without attribution. I also believe that with this technology, the rate of introduction of new work will increase, and there is a possibility that humans' ability to create more art will increase as well, so working collaboratively will be an exciting thing for me to see in the near future.
I agree that an AI cannot think for its self but have you ever thought of the fact that these AIs exist in different types. I mean I don't know a lot but am pretty sure that their are different AIs and these include those that need commands all the time and those that just do because that is how they were made and programmed and what am trying to get at is that these AIs that just do things may admire that specific drawing just like how any other human would do and then they decide to redraw the picture.
Well the fact that AI is able to recreate and create other artists' works quite fascinating and surprising at the same time but we all cannot deny the fact that the creator of any work be it music, poetry, photos and others have a copyright to their work and AI recreating their work is an infringement on such rights and I do not blame those who get annoyed by such things and as for me if I was an artist I will feel both honored and angry. Honored because they thought my work was good enough for them to attempt to to create such magnificent work of art and be angry because it will mean that AI could easily replace me if they wished and also it will mean that they could claim that my work was original when it was actually created by some software generated robot and the question is that is meant to be asked is that whether the creators of these robots should be allowed to recreate other people's works without prior permission to do such as they are the ones that tell or command these AI to do such things. So, I think strict and stringent rules should be placed to avoid or prevent AI from recreating artists works without permission and allowance from the original owners.
I totally agree with you I because artist have a right to copyright so I feel like AI has to take permission from artist before their work is copied. Certain rules and restriction should be put on AI because personally ,I would not be happy if someone copied my work.
I would feel very angry if anyone closely copied my art without my permission. I see it like stealing all my efforts. Someone went through a lot to imagine and produce an artwork, and then someone else does the same for half the effort? I'd feel bad.
I don't think AI should be allowed to copy other artist's style. I see nothing wrong with using AI to create a work of art, though, as long as it is creative and original. because Artificial Intelligence itself is a work of art.
There should be rules placed on AI generating art, because if there weren't, scenarios such as plagiarism would be very common.
I do, however, feel that, AI incorporated in art can be very entertaining, if it is original. For example, Metaphysics on America's Got Talent last year, used AI to create replicas of famous people like Simon Cowell singing onstage. In a nutshell, I find nothing wrong with AI in art unless it plagiarizes someone else's work.
Thanks for this comment enigmatic_salek. Humans often take inspiration from others in art. Do you think this is better or worse than when AI does the same?
Hi,
I feel that it is worst when humans do it , actually in fact both situations mentioned are both caused by humans, this is because well humans of course control themselves and they also control AI because it doesn't have a mind of its own and to me on both circumstances it is bad. It takes out the originality of the artwork of those artists whose idea were imposed and AI which is meant to be a breakthrough for human race is now used against the human race itself and this is sad . So in conclusion it is worse when humans do it because they use both means though some humble humans just use it as a form of inspiration which they actually use in making an entirely new style and in this condition AI is not used wrongly.
For some artists, they will call this imitation, and they will say that this is unfair. For other artists, they may like this, make them feel creative, and may increase their self-confidence. But until now I really don't know whether to be sad or happy!!
The key issue people seem to be taking with AI art is that the artists who created the images from which the programs were trained were not consulted and are not remunerated for their work. Humans are creative by nature and consequently find unique ways to solve problems, whereas AI produces results on the basis of algorithm only. It doesn't understand context, it only understands the relationship between given input and complex mathematical models. The advantages of AI are; range from streamlining, saving time, eliminating biases, and automating repetitive tasks, just to name a few. The disadvantages of AI art are; things like costly implementation, potential human job loss, and lack of emotion and creativity.
First of all, there is a big difference between taking inspiration from someone else's work and stealing it. according to Google, "Every piece of art is inspired by another, but some influences are much too obvious to pass on as 'inspiration' " When this influence is obvious, it's outright stealing. There is nothing wrong with someone being inspired by another's work, in fact, art was made to inspire. The problem, however, arises when people steal other's ideas and claim it.
There's no difference between humans and AI plagiarizing. Artificial Intelligence is just technology carrying out commands given to them by humans, anyway. So it is neither better nor worse when AI plagiarizes.
Inspiration isn't the problem, in fact, it's a gift, seeing beauty in someone's work. Plagiarism is the real stumbling block in our society today.
I think it is better because in spite of the fact that an AI is created and commanded by people we must also not forget that this is super intelligence and people are so invested in it so I really feel like an AI would rather inspire more people due to its spotlight because first of all it doesn't really give the real picture but rather a sample of the original picture so by this people are inspired to find the real picture and the artists and also artists are inspired to paint something better which boosts the art industry.
I think it's worse in both cases because when humans do so it is stealing and when AI does it is stealing as well. So I don 't think that this situation will stay the same. Sooner or later certain rules will be announced to maintain artists' rights. The singer Swings agrees that anyone could use her voice via AI but he/she should mention it and she will take her share of profit.
I strongly resonate with the opinion of the student, as I can understand the frustration and disappointment of an artist whose work has been copied without permission. Art is an expression of one's creativity and hard work, and it is unfair to see someone else benefit from it without giving proper credit or compensation. While AI can be a useful tool to create original artworks, it should not be used to copy other artists' styles or work. It's OK , if AI is used to inspire new ideas and create unique pieces of art, it can be a valuable addition to the art world. And in India we have a special style of painting called Madhubani paintings, it's a form of wall art and it is the most celebrated style of folk paintings.I agree that AI-generated art can be useful in preserving traditional art forms like Madhubani paintings. However, it is important to recognize that these traditional styles have evolved over time, influenced by the cultural and historical context in which they were created. It is therefore crucial to ensure that AI-generated art does not perpetuate cultural stereotypes or misrepresent these traditions.Artists put in a significant amount of time, effort, creativity, and resources to produce a piece of art that reflects their individual style and expression. On the other hand, AI-generated art may appear to be effortless, but it lacks the human touch, the passion, and the emotions that go into creating a unique piece of art. So I think AI can be used as a base or a model to create an art ,I mean AI can be a helpful tool for artists to use in their creative process by providing them with new ideas or inspiration. Instead of copying an existing artwork, an artist could use an AI algorithm to generate patterns or colors that they could incorporate into their own artwork, or they could use an AI-generated image as a reference to inspire their own unique creation. By using AI in this way, artists can create something that is new and original, rather than a direct copy of something that already exists.
I completely agree with you enigmatic_salak. I understand the importance of originality and creative effort in the art world. It's understandable that you would feel angry if someone copied your artwork without permission. It's like stealing your hard work and dedication.
I also agree that AI can be a valuable tool in creating art as long as it is used to produce original and unique works. AI technology itself is a form of art, and it has the potential to enhance human creativity and imagination.
However, I understand the need for regulations on AI-generated art to prevent issues like plagiarism. As you mentioned, it's crucial to ensure that AI does not replicate someone else's work without proper permission or credit.
Moreover, AI-generated art can be entertaining and fascinating, especially if it's original and innovative. The example you provided of Metaphysics on America's Got Talent shows how AI can be used to create something entertaining and impressive.
In conclusion, I completely agree that AI in art is not inherently wrong as long as it respects originality and creativity. It's essential to establish regulations and guidelines to ensure that AI-generated art does not violate ethical and legal standards.
In my own opinion AI should not copy other artists styles as it is not right. Why? because the artist own it !Their colors and measurement and other choices make that model uniquely theirs. AI cannot just come along and copy the work to use or sell for profit, that would be making profit on the original artist's efforts without permission which to me is extremely unfair.
While it's flattering to be admired by those we care about, being copied can often feel like an identity fraud. It can often almost feel like the other person is trying to take away or rob me of my uniqueness. I will also feel cheated as people will make money and gain popularity with my work and will just be a by-stander.
I feel there should be tight rules put in place for AI-generated art because currently according to my research AI art appears to be a particular threat to artists as it may use their work without their consent, approval which to me is very unfair. So, yes of course their should be set rules to regulate some of these problems.
Often groups of artists will work in the same style. For example, impressionist painters all had similarities in their paintings. Do you think this is different to when AI imitates a real life artist's style?
Hello!
I would feel deprived of originality if someone or in this case an AI were to copy my work. Why? Well because someone were to spend his time and energy on a piece of art let's say like the MONALISA and an AI were to redo it, it may lose its originality and its flair.
In my opinion I don't think it is bad for AI to be used in this modern time, but it will be unfair to the creators of the artwork as some of my fellow topical talkers have said but from my own view if AI were to be fully utilized it should be given the opportunity to think on its own and be creative rather than just reproducing human art.
Since we know that AI is the future of human endeavor, we should support it as I personally do but AI in art is a very challenging topic, but I support it as long as it has originality and effort and does not prioritize plagiarism. I think AI in art has many advantages in art such as speed, accuracy among others but for it to be utilized to the fullest many challenges have to offset first.
In fact, everyone knows that the artist's drawings express his feelings, whether he was sad, angry, or happy...etc. Also, when we look at a painting made by a man, you feel that it is full of feelings and colors, and it makes you feel how happy or sad the painter is. But can we feel this when drawing the painting with artificial intelligence?!!
Hi, genius moon! When I read your comment, it got me thinking...
Can paintings made by AI feel or make people feel? Do they convey messages the way human's paintings do?
What do you guys think?
Yes, I think AI can copy other artists' styles. Why? I did research on artificial intelligence and its negative effects, and found that anyone can copy someone else's style in an easy way and through artificial intelligence. Also, anyone can impersonate others and deceive people that they want money or information, which is unfair. The laws that exist in artificial intelligence must be put in place. During my research on this topic, I found that scholars and thinkers say that anyone who uses artificial intelligence should sign a “Non-Disclosure Agreement”, writing a report on the topics and ideas that were discussed and documenting the name of the owner of each idea in order to guarantee the rights of every person. This procedure is approved by most universities as well as major companies such as technology and energy companies. This is an example of a law that needs to be put in place also .
I agree with you, it is worth putting in place a law so as not to cause problems in the future and the fear and anxiety of people that their work will be stolen and your research on artificial intelligence is also accurate... But in your opinion, dear experts and speakers: We said that it is better to set laws that will be bad for a group of people who enter AI to steal and copy images and information. Will these laws be developed with the advice of several organizations and people? What do AI users think of this? Not all people are of the same nature, as there are (the good ones who want to use AI positively) and there are (the bad ones who use AI negatively), which leads most people to think that artificial intelligence has many and risks....
I agree because people deserve to share the right to express themselves and should not be taken advantage of for doing so through such acts of deceit and frame
Personally, I do not think it is right for artists works to be uploaded into the AI database or copied without their permission or even their knowledge. Yes, some people may see it as a way of getting inspiration but others may see it as stealing or even cheating because someone can take an artwork made by another person and with just a few modifications and the push of a button, the person can get a masterpiece without even putting in an effort, but the original owner of the artwork might have poured their heart and soul into it. This is highly unfair to the person who actually put in a lot of work. some people have no problem with their artworks being used as inspiration, but they take offence when their work is used without their opinion. Moreover, I think there should be rules put in place for AI generated arts. For example, while some artists choose to sell their works, some artists get money through royalties from licenses. This means they can give someone the liberty to copy their work for a price but they still retain ownership of the original work. In this way I think everyone will be happy because artists that are fine with people copying their work can also benefit from it, instead of the person who copied it taking all the glory.
I think artificial intelligence should not copy artists' patterns, to avoid the problem of painting theft. I would feel angry if someone copied my effort because in my opinion this is called theft. Yes, rules should be set for the art that is created in artificial intelligence. 1- Not to print anyone else's paintings. 2- There should be a sign indicating its owner in an activity on artificial intelligence. 3- That the paintings are taken from our reality and imagination.
Nice comment but I have another opinion, since all the comments are talking about the same thing that this is considered stealing, now I am suggesting that I have beautiful drawings and that I have rules and conditions in my drawings. When I find something like an AI that draws drawings and follows my terms with it, I feel proud rather than angry, and I hope artists are, too. Other than that, people know this looks like my drawing and I'm the first to do it, and to be fair, I see this needs to be done. Type the name of the artist before displaying the drawing drawn by the AI
Should AI copy artist works or styles? As we all know AI is the simulation of human intelligence processes by machines, especially computer systems. While the AI has the simulation of human intelligence, it's programmed to follow instructions. I feel that AI should not be allowed to copy artists works or styles. My first reason is because some artists will see this as a "slap in the face". Imagine you spend hours or even days trying to make the perfect art-work and when you are done, you have a feeling of happiness and pride knowing nobody can copy your work or style only to find out that an AI can do what took you hours or days in minutes. Won't you feel frustrated and angry? Frankly speaking, they find this as an insult or mockery.
My second reason why AI should not be allowed to copy artists works or styles is because I feel it dishonors artists of old when it copies their works or styles. Reason because when the artists make their works, they do so with emotions which sometimes portray on their artworks or styles such as sadness or happiness. Some people even say it carries part of their souls while on the other hand the AI does not show any emotion and merely does what it is programmed.
My third reason why AI should not be allowed to copy artists works or styles is because some people can use these to exploit or fraud people. Some people will find this as a "short-cut to success" and would want to make fast money which is I find very wrong.
However, some people may have some different ideas. Reason because artists can see this as a form of motivation to create artworks that no AI can create. You never can tell? I feel that the AI should ask for the permission of the artists before their works are copied, until then I strongly oppose AI,s copying artists works and styles.
I agree totally with your comment quirky hyena it is said some artists put in emotion as they create their masterpiece and someone invention will just easily duplicate it that will not be good. Thank you for that comment it has made me reason this topic in a whole different manner.
I think AI will be able to copy artists' work because according to BBC question, employees are afraid of losing their jobs because of AI..
1- I think that if someone copied my works for publication and it was in good interest, I would feel excited, or he might attribute my works to him, so I would feel angry...
2- Of course, laws must be put in place for artificial intelligence, because no one walks without laws, and so the machine, if laws are not set for it, will one day control the world.., but laws must be put in place for art in artificial intelligence.. so that artists do not feel distress and anxiety of losing their jobs. This is my opinion..
I would love to hear your opinion..
Thanks
Great comment. What do you mean by "one day control the world"?
I'm sorry for not being more clear, but...
Scientific and recent results of Oxford University researchers revealed that there is a possibility that artificial intelligence will outperform human intelligence by 50% within 45 years and within 120 years... AI will be able to assume all the tasks and responsibilities of humans....
Thus, artificial intelligence can control all aspects of life that we do, so technology is dangerous...
(The more technology develops, the more we advance, but danger surrounds us...)
Thanks
I do think AI should be able to take inspiration from other artists styles but not exactly copy other artists styles. When real artists create a piece of art they may take inspiration but don't exactly steal because stealing others art is extremely frowned upon so why would this change with AI. Artists who have their art copied often feel angry because most of the time they put much of their time and effort into the piece of art they have created so when an human artist copies their work they are able to be directly talk to that person about their behavior. When an AI copies art there is no directly talking to the copier because instead of a human being artificial intelligence is copying someone's art. Online I have seen many situations in which an artist has pointed out that one of their artworks was copied by AI and they really could do nothing about it. Therefore I think rules should be put in place to make sure that AI cannot exactly copy art but if they do take inspiration the artists that the AI found online should be credited.
Thank you for sharing your perspective on this topic. I agree with you that while AI should be able to take inspiration from other artists' styles, it should not be allowed to exactly copy their work without permission or proper attribution. Just like human artists, AI-generated art should be respectful of the original artists' creative process and intellectual property rights. Guidelines and regulations could help ensure that AI-generated art is created ethically and with proper attribution to the original artists.
l agree with your point that proper attribution is crucial for AI-generated art. Giving credit to the original artists not only acknowledges their creative contribution but also protects their intellectual property rights. It also helps to promote transparency and honesty in the creation of AI-generated art.
Furthermore, guidelines and regulations can play an important role in ensuring that AI-generated art is created ethically and with respect for human creativity. By establishing clear rules and standards for the use of AI in art, we can help to prevent the unauthorized copying or misuse of existing artwork, and promote the responsible development of AI-generated art.
Overall, as the use of AI in art continues to grow, it is important to prioritize ethical considerations, including proper attribution and respect for intellectual property rights. By doing so, we can help to ensure that AI-generated art remains a positive force for creativity and innovation.
Hi, I really like your point about AI-generated art being a positive force for creativity and innovation. Can you elaborate a little bit on that? Do you mean that in a world where people can freely copy each other's work, there is an ongoing incentive for individuals to keep innovating?
Thank you for your response. I completely agree that guidelines and regulations can help ensure that AI-generated art is created ethically and with proper attribution to the original artists. It is important to strike a balance between encouraging innovation and creativity with AI while also protecting the rights of artists and ensuring that their hard work is not exploited without their consent. By promoting ethical practices and respecting intellectual property rights, we can help create a more sustainable and equitable future for both human and AI-generated art.
If anyone imitates my drawing, I will feel really angry and sad, because I was the one who worked hard on it and stayed up to draw it, not him, so why is his painting more popular than mine?!!
I think AI should be able to copy other artists' style because, Copying another artist's work can be a wonderful way to learn, get inspired, get ideas, honor an influence you love, and create something new. All art is a mash up of ideas, and we can all influence and inspire each other, so long as we are creating and sharing from a place of honesty and transparency.
Copying a Painting Teaches Quality Control:
Until you begin to copy a painting you can never fully understand another artist's technique, color mixtures, or process. Without copying paintings from master artists, we would have very little idea what their palettes may have looked like.
While it's flattering to be admired by those we care about, being copied can often feel like an identity theft. It can often almost feel like the other person is trying to take away or rob us of our uniqueness. While it might be initially flattering, over time it can get very toxic.
Identity threats feel cognitively uncomfortable, and often result in us feeling annoyed with the transgressor for not being more sensitive about stealing something that feels so core to our self-image. When people copy something really important to us, it quickly goes from identity threat to identity theft. So I will feel annoyed if someone copies my work.
No I don't think that rules should be put in place for AI-generated art because Art is a fun activity, but it’s also important for a range of projects, from ad backgrounds to book covers, and it’s not always easy or cheap to acquire. AI art generators offer a solution, but it comes at a cost for human artists.
Get to know what the impact is and how you can generate and use AI art as ethically as possible. There are almost no official rules in place, so you must set your own limits, whether you’re just playing around with the technology or hoping to use it professionally.
I would feel honored if someone would closely copy my work because people would not copy my work isn't good and I would also feel honored because they were inspired by my work.
I don't think there any rule should be put in place for AI generated art because no matter how much an AI should try to express itself it may not be able to do so in the capacity that desires hence the rules limit the way AI can express itself.
Great comment. Can you expand on the importance of AI being able to express itself?
The ability for AI to express itself is useful because to some extent AI is a voice for the under represented and also for those who cannot speak for themselves. So basically if AI cannot express itself what exactly is its use.
I don't think AI should be able to copy other artists' styles. I don't think it should be able to copy styles simply because all of the work that would be outdone by the AI. An example of this would be if you were to work as a freelance artist that makes money on commissions. You would lose a lot of money if AI could perfectly recreate your artstyle. A random person could plug your art into an AI, and have it spout out a perfectly new art that was created from a baseline of your art. At the very least permission should be given to the AI before it can use your work as inspiration for its art.
If someone were to closely copy my work, and produce it as theirs I would be frustrated. It was my work they copied off of and if they were to get recognition from it I would be even more angry. This is different when someone asks to use your work as a baseline for theirs. They may have liked the way you articulated your ideas into something and want to create something like it. This is how many artists and musicians improve. Artists may trace another artist's drawing to see how they did the work, and musicians may incorporate a melody from another song to try to remix it. If someone asked to use my work before using it I would be flattered. Imitation is the best form of flattery.
There should be rules for AI art. A rule I would implement would be for artists to be asked if their work can be stored in a database the AI could draw from. It also should not be able to be copyrighted. If you were to try to copyright claim something that you only made by giving a prompt to an AI it could be identified as fraud. You technically didn't make the art; an AI did all the work from the prompt that was given to it. The final rule I would make is that there should also be disclaimers for if something is made from an AI. There has recently been a trend of making voices through AI programs. Some AIs are able to perfectly replicate a voice, and the only way to identify them is in the way they may say words or if their tone matches the thing they're talking about. This could ruin the lives of people if it were to fall into the wrong hands. Politicians can be framed for something they didn't say and court evidence can be faked.
Overall, there should be restrictions on AI. It has many imperfections and they will most likely smoothen out in the future, but as it is now it could be a danger.
I agree with your point, but I will be honoured if someone copies my work because it can lead to global recognition if it is linked back to my original masterpiece, which should be done with permission. I also believe that someone who uses artificial intelligence to create art can be called an artist because it takes a lot of imagination to improve on someone else's work. I also believe that with the advancement of AI and its application in other fields of study, we will be able to take more risks and reduce the many limitations of humans, particularly in fields such as medicine.
Based on my research about AI and The Arts, AI can copy other artists' styles through a process called style transfer. Style transfer involves analyzing the patterns and textures of an artwork and then applying those attributes to a new piece of art. While this can be a useful tool for artists looking to experiment with different styles or create new artwork based on existing styles, there are also ethical considerations to be made. Some people argue that copying other artists' styles could be seen as a form of plagiarism, as it involves taking someone else's creative work and using it for one's own purposes. Others argue that style transfer is simply a tool and that the ethical implications depend on how it is used. For example, if an artist uses style transfer to create new artwork that is clearly inspired by a particular artist's style but adds their own unique twist, this could be seen as a form of homage rather than plagiarism. Finally, the question of whether AI should be able to copy other artists' styles is a complex one that depends on many factors, including the intended use of the artwork and the ethical implications of copying someone else's work. Ultimately, it is up to individuals and society to determine what is acceptable and what is not when it comes to As an AI language model, I don't have personal feelings or emotions, but I can provide some insight into how people might feel about having their work closely copied.
How we strike the right balance between innovation and inspiration form artists and honouring their hard work?
The person who uses artificial intelligence to modify the idea of another artist and develop it to produce a new creation must take permission in advance from the artist and mention that the origin of the idea in his work belongs to this artist and by this way he will give appreciation and respect for the original effort and by this way we protect the artist’s right and copyright and we have created a new innovative idea from the effort of a great artist as a base for this new idea .
I do not know, sometimes the idea is the same, but each person has his own style, and this is what artificial intelligence lacks. As for innovation and inspiration, inspiration is the idea. As for innovation, it is your own style. Some people lack innovation, but they have inspiration and ideas. Thus, artificial intelligence will help them appear instead of stealing As for the danger of lack of art, we should not worry because artificial intelligence has the ability, but it is incapable of implementation if it does not have the idea. As for how to honor artists, I think that the awards they receive are of no value to them. The real prize lies in giving them inspiration, encouraging them, and giving them a role in society.
How would you feel if someone closely copied something you had made? Excited? Honored? Flattered? Or maybe angry? This question made my mind to think a lot about this,
The way someone would feel about having their work closely copied would depend on several factors, such as the context in which the copying occurred, the intentions of the person doing the copying, and the level of originality and effort that went into the original work. Some people might feel flattered or honored if someone closely copied their work, especially if the copying was done in a respectful and admiring way. Others might feel angry or upset if the copying was done without permission or credit given, or if the copied work was used for commercial gain. Of course, the way someone feels about having their work copied is a personal matter and will vary from person to person. In some cases, it may be appropriate to take legal action if the copying violates copyright laws or other intellectual property rights. AI and art. As AI-generated art becomes more prevalent, there are increasing calls for rules and regulations to be put in place to address issues related to intellectual property, ownership, and attribution.
Hi thoughtful_cliff,
You pick up on a lot of good points here on how artists might feel when having their work copied. You also identify that the law can be used to protect artists who do not wish to be copied. How do you think we could regulate this in the digital space? One example might be creating AI which is able to automatically identify whether work is protected by IP/copyright laws. Can you think of any other ways?
Yes, absolutely mam, there are various ways that we could regulate the issue of digital copyright infringement and protect the rights of artists in the digital space. Some of them are:
Developing better tools for identifying copyright infringement: As you mentioned, AI and other technologies could be used to develop more accurate and efficient methods of identifying when copyrighted works are being used without permission. This could involve using machine learning algorithms to scan for specific patterns or identifying features in digital content that match known copyrighted works.
Increasing awareness of copyright laws: Many people may not be aware of copyright laws and how they apply to digital content. By increasing awareness and education around these issues, we can help to create a culture of respect for artists' rights and discourage infringement.
Strengthening legal protections for artists: One way to do this would be to enact stronger copyright laws that provide more robust protections for artists' intellectual property rights. This could include extending copyright terms or increasing the penalties for infringement.
Encouraging the use of digital rights management (DRM) technology: DRM technology can be used to prevent unauthorized copying and distribution of digital content. By encouraging the use of DRM technology, we can help to protect the rights of artists and ensure that they are properly compensated for their work.
From my point of aspect, A multifaceted approach will likely be necessary to effectively regulate digital copyright infringement and protect the rights of artists. This will involve a combination of technological solutions, legal protections, and education and awareness initiatives.
In recognizing the pervasive challenge of digital copyright infringement and the importance of protecting artists' rights in the digital realm, I firmly believe in the power of a multifaceted approach. By harnessing cutting-edge technologies, such as AI and machine learning, we can develop advanced tools that accurately identify and mitigate copyright infringement, fostering a digital ecosystem where artists' creations are safeguarded. Concurrently, comprehensive education and awareness initiatives are vital, empowering individuals to respect and uphold copyright laws. Additionally, by advocating for stronger legal protections, including extended copyright terms and more stringent penalties for infringement, we establish a solid legal framework that upholds artists' intellectual property rights. Embracing the responsible implementation of digital rights management technology further fortifies this ecosystem, ensuring fair compensation for artists and discouraging unauthorized distribution. With this holistic approach, we can pave the way for a thriving digital landscape that respects creativity, rewards innovation, and secures the rights of artists, ultimately fostering a vibrant and sustainable future for the arts."
I think some people might feel flattered and honoured that someone found their work inspiring and they may feel proud too but for some people it may make them feel angry and disappointed by seeing people copying their work without asking any permission and giving credits to their hardwork. They might feel like their hardwork has been stolen. And I think It is true that each artist has their own unique style of creating art, which is influenced by their personal experiences, emotions, and creative vision. While it is possible for other artists or even AI technology to imitate or replicate certain visual elements or techniques used by an artist, it is difficult to capture the full essence and personal touch of their style. For example let us take same artist, van Gogh often used strong contrasts of light and dark to convey a sense of depth and drama in his paintings. He also painted quickly and impulsively, allowing his emotions to guide his brushstrokes.So,simply copying van Gogh's visual style without understanding the emotional and personal context behind his art would not capture the full essence of his work.
And most importantly if we try to copy someone's style and get appreciative comments it won't last for long period and it would definitely not satisfy our soul. And if we do so our own talents can disappear. Each one has a unique style and I think the art is all about that.As AI technology advances, it is crucial to address ethical concerns related to the creation of AI-generated art. We must strive to ensure that AI-generated art does not infringe upon the intellectual property rights of original artists and that it upholds the principles of creativity, authenticity, and respect for artistic expression. By exploring these ethical questions and developing frameworks for responsible AI-generated art, we can promote innovation and creativity while also safeguarding the rights and dignity of artists.
Some rules that could be considered: Artists and developers involved in the creation of AI-generated art should receive fair compensation for their work and contributions.AI-generated art should be subject to human oversight to ensure that it meets ethical and legal standards. This could involve having trained professionals review AI-generated art before it is released to the public, or implementing a system of checks and balances to prevent misuse or abuse of AI-generated art.
How Might AI Art Change the world ? AI art has the potential to revolutionize the way we create and consume art. With the help of AI, artists can create unique and innovative pieces that were previously impossible to achieve. AI-generated art can also democratize art-making, making it more accessible to people who may not have traditional artistic skills or training. Moreover, AI art can challenge our understanding of creativity and the role of the artist in society. As AI art continues to evolve, it may even lead to new forms of art that are completely unique to our current understanding of artistic expression.
The ability of AI to copy other artists' styles is a complex issue that raises questions about creativity, originality, and intellectual property. On one hand, AI can be trained to analyze and reproduce artistic styles, allowing for the creation of new works that are inspired by established artists. This could potentially lead to a democratization of art, making it more accessible to a wider audience.
Furthermore, copying art through AI could potentially devalue the original work of the artist and undermine their ability to earn a living from their creations. It also raises questions about intellectual property and the implications of reproducing someone else's work without their permission.
In the end, I think that no AI should copy anyones art.
From my point of view, if the patterns of artists are reproduced, it may lead to deceiving people, so that a person takes out a painting of artificial intelligence with the Vascodi Fanci pattern, and he says that it is his, and it is possible that you are positive so that the pictures are displayed as drawn by the artists 2. Honestly, I will be very angry because what I have done and tired of it has been taken, and it may be a work that is dear to me, or I present it to someone dear to me, and if it is stolen, I will be desperate, miserable, angry and sad 3. In my opinion, this should be done so that artists' paintings and styles are not stolen and people are not deceived
1.Do you think AI should be able to copy other artists’ styles? Why or why not?'-I think it is not that bad for the AI to copy other artists style because even the human artists gets inspired by few styles and try to copy it so if the AI is going to copy another persons style then it must give the recognition to that particular artist.
2.How would you feel if someone closely copied something you had made? Excited? Honoured? Flattered? Or maybe angry?-It depends on the person and the way they do it if that particular person got my permission and would recognise me in that work,I will fell very honoured because it means that my work is really good that someone is trying to copy it.It might even be a chance to make my works popular.
3.Should any rules be put in place for AI-generated art?-yes I think that their should be certain strict rules few of which is "Every AI generated work must have a logo below it ,denoting that it was created by AI ,if it was copied from the style of other artist then their names should also be printed below."
Or
"Every AI must have a license if they are going to use the style of a alive artist then the artist must also give his approval"
Yes I think AI should be able to copy other artists styles. If they copy other artists styles it means that their styles are liked and loved and are displayed for people to see. When other people see and use the style the artists popularity increases. There are numerous styles that Artists have made popular like renaissance, art nouveau impressionism etc
I would feel excited and honoured if someone closely copied what I made because then I would know that the person really liked what I made and even got his inspiration from what I made
If there should be any rules to be put in place for AI-generated art I think it should be that there shouldn't be any style or design completely copied from the person who made it, but rather it should be changed even if it's a bit, it should be change at least so it won't seem like it's stealing other people's style or design and displaying it as their own. The artist whose style is copied should also be given credit for their style.
Artificial intelligence must copy the artists’ works and save them, so that if the paintings suffer any harm, they will be preserved from artificial intelligence for other generations, and that artificial intelligence does not allow anyone to use the images for illegal acts. Everyone else should copy it because this is a theft policy in which the thief is thanked. As for the real person who worked hard for the sake of the workers, we do not care about him or thank him. This is very widespread in the world and must be reduced. Really, I would be angry if someone stole my work and I will not forgive him, and I thank Topical Tolk for He does not accept any comments copied from people 💖, as I said in a previous comment, I am a person who loves laws very much, and if there are no laws, the world will collapse, and even for art there must be laws so that similar ideas and similar paintings are not produced, and I believe that there must be laws .. ..what do you think????
Do you think AI should be able to copy other artists' styles? Why or why not?
I think Al shouldn't copy other artists' styles exactly because everyone has their personality but maybe they can imitate his style.
How would you feel if someone closely copied something you had made? Excited? Honored? Flattered? Or maybe angry? I don't know but I don't think that I will be angry too much but maybe I will refuse, I just will say it is mine and no one has the right to copy it without asking me.
Should any rules be put in place for AI-generated art? I think yes because now Al is prevalent more than in the past so they should put rules and Punishment who copy it
Hi jubilant wallaby,
This time around I am disagreeing with your comment, for the fact someone choose to copy your artwork it means your artwork is unique and outstanding, I feel you should be honored and encouraged that someone got inspiration from your artwork, maybe the person has made you his mentor and wants to be exactly like you. But I will admit you are right when you say no one has the right to copy you without asking you, it's wrong. Whoever wants to copy an artwork or to do something close to an already existing artwork should seek the permission of the artist.
Exactly my point because it wouldn't actually be fair if an AI just pops up and copies an original work which an individual took his or her time in doing....
For me, I think great example is that of Drake and the Weekend. I'm not really a huge fan of any but I'm strongly not in support of what happened. I do understand that most individuals do not see it as theft or stealing but I do. And its not nice.
How would you feel if someone closely copied something you had made? Obviously no one would really like it. Worse situation would even be if the person or AI who copied your work is getting more attention or likes than your original copy. That would actually hurt badly💔😪
So in my opinion, I would actually say that AI practice should have its rules that prohibits it from doing anything without seeking permission or something else. Although AI do have a lot of its advantages that are really helpful and useful to human beings, they should be regulated.
I think that. AI shouldn't be able to copy other artists' styles because this is considered to be a steal and illegal action . When you steal others'
thoughts or styles this action is exactly like stealing others' money or property.
I think there must be rules and laws that control Al generated art because this is the modern and civilized action otherwise it will not be acceptable art.
I think it's unfair to let the AI copies the
artist 's works especially without permission because the artist feels proud to show his own work which is distinguished him among people . He feels he is special with his creativity.
Really, I will be angry if my work is copied. I think someone steal my work .
So, I think some laws should be put to keep the artist's rights .
In muy opininion if you want yo use IA to make art is has its dificult because you must know how to do it , but I also think that make It with your own hands has more dificult.
Hi selfassured_grapefruit,
You're right - making art yourself without the use of AI would be more difficult. Do you think that AI should be allowed to make copies of artworks which a person has spent a lot of time creating with their own hands? Why / Why not?
As a student at prep school I will talk about arguments :
Arguments for Putting Rules in Place:
1. AI-generated art may contain inappropriate content - Due to the nature of AI-generated art, it may contain images or messages that are inappropriate for this age group. There is a risk that students may be exposed to images that are violent, sexually explicit, or otherwise harmful.
2. AI-generated art may not have educational value - Another concern is that AI-generated art may not have any educational value. In this case, students may be wasting their time viewing or interacting with images that do not enhance their learning.
3. AI-generated art may interfere with creativity - There is also the fear that AI-generated art may interfere with students' creativity. Students may rely too heavily on AI-generated art, instead of developing their own creativity and artistic ability.
Arguments Against Putting Rules in Place:
1. AI-generated art is a new and exciting form of art - AI-generated art is still in its infancy, and there is a sense that it is a new and exciting form of art that should be encouraged. By putting rules in place, we run the risk of stifling creativity and innovation.
2. There are already rules in place for other forms of art - Many argue that there are already rules in place for other art forms, such as movies, music, and books. Therefore, we do not need to create additional rules for AI-generated art.
3. The responsibility falls on the parents and teachers - Ultimately, it is the responsibility of parents and teachers to ensure that students are not exposed to inappropriate content. They can do this by monitoring the art that their children view and discussing the content with them.
Hi, I really enjoyed reading your pros and cons analysis. May I ask your final position, are you in favour or against putting rules for AI-based artwork?
Of course it is theft. If I am an artist and someone comes and uses my style without asking permission from me, I will file a theft case against him. Therefore, I do not think it is fair for artificial intelligence to use an artist’s style without taking his permission. Therefore, an end must be put to those programmers who make artificial intelligence steal artists’ work and record it. in his name
I don't think AI should be able to copy the sayings of artists, blurring out the real artists. You may ask what I mean by this. I'll explain what I mean when artists use AI. Does this require intelligence from humans, but rather kill their creativity? The fake artist is the one who uses the intelligence of others and this is my point of view
As for the second question, I would feel annoyance, anger and hatred if someone stole my work. I am the one who worked hard and worked hard to make this project and show it with the best revolution, and someone steals my work and he did not put in an iota of fatigue, and his work gains the admiration of others and thanks and praise goes to him while he is a thief and I am the owner of the effort and work, why? Isn't this considered theft and violation of human rights?
The third question, although I do not support artificial intelligence whose negatives outweigh its positives, but if we work on it, I expect that laws will be put in place to reduce theft or violation of human rights, when laws and penalties are put in place, I think that the matter will go well and its negatives will end
Rules governing AI-generated art should aim to ensure that the art is neutral and not contributing to cultural or social bias. Additionally, the art should not be used for commercial or marketing purposes, and any sponsored art should be transparently labeled as such. Educators should also be provided with guidelines to navigate the ethical implication of AI-generated art, in some cases a prior review should be conducted by a body of experts to ensure the safety and educational value of the art pieces.
when I asked my grandfather as he an academic researcher Should tere be rules for ai he said as an academic researcher, it is important to always give proper credit to the sources you use in your research. Citing your sources accurately can prevent plagiarism by giving credit to the creators of original works, as well as providing a means for readers to verify the information you present in your research.
Additionally, it is essential to critically evaluate sources and use reliable and reputable sources for your research. Using inaccurate or biased sources can undermine the credibility of your research and invalidate your findings.
Therefore, I would strongly advise against stealing inspiration or ideas from other people and claiming them as your own. Instead, it is important to conduct thorough research, cite sources accurately, and to give credit where it is due
Your grandfather made a really good point, giving credit is a must do. Thinking about how rules governing the use of AI would exist in practice, how do you see those? Do you believe it should be always possible to trace which previous pieces of work have been used to create an AI-based piece of art?
In my opinion it is essential to maintain transparency . The art world has always placed great significance on originality and creativity. An AI-generated piece of art might be considered as unique, but the fact that it was created using pre-existing codes, algorithms, and databases puts a question mark on its originality
1. I do not think so because I believe we need to keep humans superior to other creatures and products.
2. I feel depressed as this reduces the value of the time I wasted on doing it.
3. Yes I do as everything in the world has to abide by rules to keep the world in order as much as we can.
Thanks so much for someone say my comment
The first question: I do not think it is theft because artificial intelligence is taken from human intelligence.
The second question: To be honest, I will be angry because he steals the trouble of others.
He can ask for permission and of course I will give him an idea and he can think of something new and wonderful.
The third question: I think it is better to enact laws.
Copying and stealing someone else's work is not a beautiful thing, as it violates the rights of the person who stayed up late nights and failed several times and did not give up and explored many things until I painted him in this way now. The person asking permission is possible for the person to agreeBut with permission, he must write the name of the original person who did that before in his work or book. I see that a lot in the Arabic language book. We have many lessons and they are all inspired by multiple books, but at the end of each lesson is the name of the book and the name of the author, and I see this thing the correct
Also, in our country, they set a law for anyone who copies or steals someone's work to be punished in court, and I see that not only in our country, but all over the world.
Also, in this project, one of its most important conditions is that it is not permissible to copy from another student, and this is very beautiful
On the other hand, I have the opinion that when the artificial intelligence is able to make a drawing similar to yours, this is very beautiful, i.e. he likes your art, and he should feel proud, not angry
Introduction
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been a hot topic in the art world. With algorithms that can replicate the styles of great artists from the past, to generate new and previously unimagined works, AI has opened up new possibilities for creating, sharing, and experiencing art. However, this has also raised questions about the ethics of AI-generated art, including whether AI should be able to copy
The concerns around AI-generated art are complex. While AI technology is providing new artistic possibilities, it also raises important questions about the role of human creativity, originality, and authenticity in the art world. On the one hand, AI-generated art can help to democratize the art world by increasing access and providing new levels of creativity. On the other hand, AI-generated art also raises ethical questions around authorship, authenticity, and creativity. Therefore, it is important that clear guidelines are put in place to ensure the ethical use of AI-generated art. These guidelines will help ensure that everyone in the art world, from artists to consumers, can feel confident that they are interacting and engaging with art in an ethical and transparent way.
Yes, I will feel very angry because the person has taken all my effort and this thing has happened to me.... For example, if the teacher asks us to do a research on something, I will search and read books until I get correct and good information. It may take an hour to get a Good information, ........in the end, person comes and takes my research. It is difficult for me........ Also, artificial intelligence, if it steals the works of artists, will angry the artist whose work was stolen. I do not advise anyone who took the effort of others, because you must make an effort in your life. To be a successful person
Whatever AI creates or generates, it will be based on millions of samples given to it. The work created by AI will have the shade of any artists creativity. AI should not copy from any artist because it will decrease the artist's fame, popularity and hardwork. Also the work done by AI wil not have any uniqueness as the work done by any artist.
I will not be happy if AI should copy my work. Besides this is a new invention and people will like to see AI do these things which will just make me in the shadows of AI even though I first came up with the art. With the invention of AI doing art, I think they should come up with strict antiplagiarism laws to ensure that no one copies my work.
I do not support any of the two concepts (inspiration _ theft). Rather, it is imitation. I support artificial intelligence art, but if it imitates the style of an artist who died and is not alive, because he revives his beautiful style and provides more of his works, which reduces their price, but I do not encourage them if it is a style An artist is alive because he will stop his work and publish copies of it, and because he works to inspire the user, this will destroy the work of contemporary artists and will cut off their source of income and cut off the paths of inspiration. I really do not like someone copying or imitating my drawings with ease. In return, I have made an effort And a great time too
I think people can specialize in creating their own art using AI not necessarily copying the works of other artist. People might have a passion for music but due to circumstance they are unable to effectively pronounce their passion. With this being said, AI can be used to help them to express their passions and also if anyone thinks that the use of AI is cannot be referred as hard work then I disagree. Some people who have been blessed with the talent of using artificial intelligence to create art that is unique. By the way a combination of AI and the human brain will create magnificent work.
Considering the question "Do you think AI should be able to copy other artists’ styles", I would not support this because AI in our modern days tends to bring about some disadvantages to artist in the field such as plagiarism, artist become more lazy, and also it is emotionless and lack human touch which makes them unable to express their emotions, feelings, or imaginations in their art work which is a very essential requirement in art. and also AI is not to be copying other artist styles but instead AI is to produce and design their own arts for human artist to learn from due to the fact it is smarter, better and more accurate than us and I believe that this will have a great impact to artist by encouraging them, giving them more ideas and it would serve as a model and inspiration to human artist
I believe that artificial intelligence should not copy the patterns of artists!!
Because every artist has a pattern and style that he owns, and no one has the right to steal it.
For example, if I am an artist and someone steals my hard work, I will be really angry. I think there should be rules for the art created by artificial intelligence, because if there are no rules, then injustice, fraud and impersonation methods will spread in society, and this thing spoils the happiness of people artists.
Therefore, I do not see it appropriate for artificial intelligence to copy the works and styles of artists.
If someone would copy me, I would feel utterly disgusted about it. It is my work, my idea, and someone stole it right in front of my nose. It is also quite flattering, however. It means the person really liked the idea.
I don't think AI should be able to copy other artists' style because they might feel bad for some one to copy their art work also the paint will have no value anymore because everyone can get it for free.
If a person closely copied something i have made to me it is just like coping my work exactly and if something like this occurs i will try and be patient because if i would be angry i may end up cursing that person which is not good.
yes their should be a lot of rules should be put in place for AI-generated art
I want to answer the third argument
As AI-generated art becomes more widespread and sophisticated, there is a growing need to consider the ethical and legal implications of such art. While AI-generated art can be stunning and beautiful, it raises questions about authorship, ownership, and cultural exploitation.
Therefore, there may be a need to establish some rules and guidelines to regulate AI-generated art. Some areas that could be focused on include:
Authorship: One of the main issues in AI-generated art is determining who is considered the author of the work. If the AI is the one creating the artwork, who is considered the author? Is it the programmer, the machine, or both? Rules and guidelines may need to be established to determine who owns the intellectual property rights to the artwork.
Cultural exploitation: AI-generated art, like human artists, can also be susceptible to cultural exploitation. Rules and guidelines can be established to ensure that the cultural origins and significance of the artwork are respected and acknowledged.
Your point about cultural exploitation is interesting -- can you explain a bit more about this? And maybe give some examples from your culture?
Of course, I can explain more about cultural exploitation
"Cultural appropriation in artificial intelligence in art"
The term "cultural appropriation in artificial intelligence in art" refers to the use of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence to produce artistic works based on other cultures and traditions without giving adequate consideration to the cultural, historical, and social impacts represented by these cultures. Cultural appropriation can lead to a decrease in the artistic and cultural value of the artwork and may also insult the targeted communities.
Cultural appropriation in artificial intelligence in art can be expressed by using indigenous cultures to obtain creative material without giving proper credit to the source and the potential impacts of using such material in art. It can also occur by misrepresenting other cultures in commercial or exaggerated ways, which can cause significant harm to the correct portrayal of those cultures.
Creators and professionals in the field of artificial intelligence and art should strive to avoid cultural appropriation in artificial intelligence in art. This can be achieved through researching and learning about the original cultures, their history, and the impacts they have made, and using these materials in a respectful and objective manner, avoiding their use in misleading, commercial, or incorrect ways.
1 ) Personally, I think that AI should be able to copy other artists' styles to a certain extent. While it may seem like an infringement upon an artist's unique style and individuality, it could also provide valuable insights into the techniques and methods that make certain artists successful. Additionally, it could be used as a tool for educational purposes or even for generating new content. However, there is a fine line between using AI to gain inspiration and outright plagiarism. it would be important to ensure that proper accreditation is given to the original artists and that any reproductions are done in a respectful manner. So I think the owner of the art should determine if the AI can copy its pattern or not .
2 ) Having someone closely copy something I had produced can evoke a range of emotions. On the one hand, it can serve as validation that my work is appreciated and valuable enough to be replicated. On the other hand, it can also feel like a violation of my creativity and intellectual property. Overall, I would prefer that others admire my work and use it as inspiration rather than attempt to outright mimic or plagiarize it . I think I should strive for individuality in my hobby " writing" while encouraging others to do the same through respect for originality and creative expression.
3 ) Aren't we getting ahead of ourselves with this AI-generated art business? Do we really want to leave everything to the robots and risk losing our own artistic skills in the process? Who owns the rights to these creations? Are they truly original pieces or just copies of pre-existing works? It's a slippery slope we're on here. Therefore, I say yes - rules should definitely be put in place for AI-generated art. It's about time we take a step back and ensure that creativity remains in human hands while also holding technology accountable for its actions.
I'm very curious to see if any other Topical Talkers want to respond to anything within your third point! Particularly your statement: "Aren't we getting ahead of ourselves with this AI-generated art business?"
I'm gonna respond it 🙃 .
It's truly amazing to see the advancements that have been made in AI-generated art, and the potential it holds for revolutionizing the art world. However, I can't help but wonder if we're getting ahead of ourselves with this technology. While AI can produce stunning pieces of art, it lacks the emotional depth and human touch that traditional art possesses. Additionally, there are concerns about copyright infringement and intellectual property rights when it comes to AI-generated work. Despite these concerns, I'm excited to see where this technology takes us and how it will change the industry. Perhaps AI-generated art will inspire new forms of creativity and expression that were previously unimaginable. Only time will tell how this exciting development in art will shape our future 🤷🏼♀️.
AI in art curation: AI can be used to curate art exhibitions and collections, helping to identify patterns and connections between artworks. The Tate gallery in London, for example, used machine learning to analyze its collection of British art and identify previously overlooked female artists.
It's important to acknowledge the original artist's contribution and creative expression when using AI to create art that resembles someone else's work. Just because it's an AI, it doesn't mean it's okay to use someone else's art without permission or credit. Copyright laws exist to protect artists' intellectual property, and using AI to create derivative works that closely resemble someone else's original work could potentially be considered a copyright infringement.
While an artist's reaction to having their work copied may vary, it's possible for them to feel flattered if someone is inspired by their work and creates something new from it. However, they could also feel violated if their work is copied without permission or credit.
To address the ethical concerns surrounding AI-generated art, guidelines or regulations may need to be established for how this technology is used. This could include requiring permission from the original artist before using their work in AI databases or establishing clear distinctions between AI-generated art and original artwork. It's also important to consider the potential impact of AI on the art world and how it could change the way we perceive and value creative expression.
I think that AI should also have some rules.
Your last sentence really got me thinking, remarkable_wasp! Could you tell me a bit more about your idea: "It's also important to consider the potential impact of AI on the art world and how it could change the way we perceive and value creative expression."
Certainly! As AI continues to advance, it has the potential to revolutionize the way we create and experience art. However, it also raises complex ethical questions regarding the role of the artist, the originality and ownership of AI-generated art, and the impact on traditional art systems.
To address these concerns, it's important to establish rules and guidelines for the use of AI in the creation of art, such as requiring attribution and permission from original artists, and establishing clear distinctions between AI-generated and human-generated art. Regulations for training data can also ensure the ethical use of protected materials.
Additionally, transparency and explainability in the development of AI-generated art can promote ethical and responsible innovation. Ultimately, ongoing conversations about the implications of AI on the art world can help us navigate these complexities and ensure that this technology benefits both artists and society as a whole.
I think, human or AI "A rule is a rule for all."
"Art does not need an artist only! Rather, it requires an artist and a programmer at the same time." Fahad Al-Hazmi Therefore, I believe that Al does not eliminate the artist and does not diminish his status, as it gives him more experiences and different methods. It also keeps the impact of the artist present by using his style in his absence and learning Other artists than him! In the end, I hope that each artist's imprint remains his own without being altered by Al.
I agree with everything you all have said especially you trusting theory and your point about permission. I think that AI art is a very contravene concept and that to help it improve it really needs human interaction. If people were to permit it to use their work I think it would be better for the AI and humans. As you have all said, artists are having their work used and drawn and copied also by AI without their permission, and this is only going to cause the hate for AI to grow and the harm against human lives to grow as well.
I know it is very important for the property rights to avoid duplication and reproduction of their unique artworks so I believe they should not be allowed to copy their styles
I think depending of your view of the topic you will either be angry or flattered to have your work copied, because it signifies fame and popularity but also portrays disrespect.
Some good points here! Can you explain a bit more about what you mean by it "portrays disrespect"?
I mean it shows disrespect and doesn't make the artist feel valued and makes the artist feel their work is not regarded for if made by them.
I hope this explanation was clear.
In my opinion, AI should not be allowed to copy artists' styles because AI-generated artwork lacks the human touch and emotional depth that comes from a human artist's personal experience and interpretation of the world.
Art is often seen as a reflection of an artist's inner thoughts, feelings, and experiences, and the unique style that emerges from that I feel can't be replicated by a machine, while AI may be able to mimic certain aspects of an artist's style, it is incapable of truly understanding the meaning and intention behind it.
Moreover, AI-generated artwork may also be seen as a threat to the livelihoods of human artists, if machines can replicate famous artists' styles, it could undermine the market for original art and lead to a devaluation of the work of living artists. Another issue is the ethical considerations of copying other artists' styles without proper attribution or consent. If AI-generated artwork is indistinguishable from human-generated artwork, it could create confusion and disputes over the ownership and authenticity of a piece.
In conclusion to my point, I see AI has the potential to create unique and innovative works of art, but there are valid concerns about its ability to replicate human artists' styles like the emotional depth and personal touch that human artists bring to their work cannot be replaced by a machine, and the ethical and economic considerations of AI-generated artwork need to be carefully examined.
Hello
In my opinion there is a difference between theft and inspiration
Let me show you the difference
First, theft (Art ) is to take the idea as a whole, such as you can say (copy _ paste), where it takes many forms, such as stealing the content, the idea and returning it as it is again, etc.
As for inspiration, it is taking the idea, but with development and putting the creativity of the inspired, where you can take the idea and put your field in it and develop it with the setting of the inspiring source
AI and film: AI can be used in film production and post-production, helping to create realistic special effects or make editing decisions. The movie "The Irishman" used AI to de-age its actors in certain scenes, allowing them to play younger versions of themselves.
Stealing other artists 'work should be forbidden even it's artificial intelligence.
I am sure that human is more intelligent than AI because he who created and controlled it,and human must respect others owes. Alot of strong rules and limits should be put in place for AI generated art
I think AI should not be able to copy other artists' styles. I say this because doing this takes away the originality and authenticity of the artwork. This therefore takes away, in a sense, the creativity of the artwork.
If someone closely copied something I had made, I would be both flattered and angry.
I think a few rules should be put in place for AI-generated art. One can be asking artists for permission before using their artworks to create another artwork.
I think that an AI artist is as much an artist as a human one is. The advancement of AI can create a new generation of great artists. The fact that the AI took inspiration from some popular artists and songwriters does not necessarily mean that they were copying their work. I think of it as how many great artists had role models or influencers who were the source of some of their style of art. I would feel flattered if someone copied or took inspiration from my work because it would mean that what i created was good enough that someone would want to replicate it. Although I believe that AI is for the better, there are some rules that need to be put in place to prevent unwanted forging. AI artists should get in contact with anyone they want to take inspiration from to get approval before proceeding to create a piece of art or music.
In my opinion, I think it was stealing, we talked about the story of Drake and The Weekend and I really heard and knew this story because Iam a real fan of the weekend , and the story of the electrical it wasn't stealing because he says he did that to create a discussion about the future of photography
I would be visibly annoyed and angry if any individual copied my artwork without prior consent. It is like putting much effort and hardwork into something and seeing someone else do the same thing using only partial effort. However, AI has the ability to create unique and diverse artworks because the range of art is vast and nearly limitless. It is not wrong for AI to make artworks; nonetheless, it is undesirable for AI to plagiarize the works of other artists. This is why AI should be subject to laws and restrictions to ensure that AI plagiarism in art does not threaten other artists.
I think one way we can reduce this AI copying our work is by setting it up with a database of artworks. the AI should scan it and anything similar to it will not be created.
If this happens, will you really lead them, and how and who will lead the owners of the idea of Al or those in charge of working in it? Together, but I have another question. If this thing happened without your desire and you tried them, what conditions would you put on them?
1)Yes ; Because all artists in this life follow the path of a previous artist and work on developing it, and artificial intelligence plays a major role in the life of the biggest artists, as it helps to make the work more realistic.
2)In this case I want to say something
That person who copies the work that he did with effort and fatigue, the person will feel happy if that person copies it and acknowledges it in the original owner of this work
But if he attributed it to him, it would really piss him off! Because it is an invasion of privacy.
3)Yes, art laws should be established so that the work is sequential and with high accuracy.
As for artificial intelligence, it is possible that artificial intelligence is the one that broke all the rules of art.
This is my opinion.
As for me, I don't think human or artificial intelligence has the right to steal other people's work or style, Because the artists' special style is what highlights their personality and distinguishes them from others, which is what gives art its value, and as for me, I would not allow such an act if the judgment was in my hands unless the owner of the artwork agreed to that. In fact, I was exposed to a situation that made me decisive when I said such words, because I often draw and write stories, and two years ago I created an account on Instagram and started publishing stories and drawings in it, but I stopped using social media Because someone stole my work and accused me of imitation, and I did not have many followers who stood by me, so I put a video explaining everything and put the evidence and then published it and retired from that I know how angry and sad artists are when their style is copied and I hope it doesn't happen because of some argument like technological progress, .
If that happens then art will no longer be anything special, Also, the fact that artificial intelligence is just machines and programs does not forgive them for stealing the style of others, so certainly laws must be put in place to use artificial intelligence in all fields, not just art,Because I expect that artificial intelligence will be widely available and in every home, just as there is a phone in the house now
I will be angry if someone tried or attempted to copy my work without prior permission or allowance and take credit or gains publicity and attention or fame when my work was duplicated and copied without me knowing or being acknowledged for the creation of such masterpiece that a fraud just came across and used AI the wrong way as long as you created something and released to the public you own a copyright and anyone who abuses that right or infringes upon it is basically a thief. Yes, honestly, I do think rules and regulations concerning the use of AI to copy other artist works should be created and enforced upon these set of people and actually it won't be fair if people copied other people works without acknowledging and giving proper credit to the original owners it is important to do such to maintain respect, equality, equity and standard in the art and expressive industry. AI was created to help the lives of individuals and reduce the time, energy and resources we use to perform our daily activities and roles in our lives this is an innovative and technological milestone that we have created and now using it to copy and duplicate other people work is just dumb and stupid for AI to do AI has the abilities things to do things that are unimaginable and now we use for something as trivial and irrelevant to society we have been given a tool that could potentially solve most of our problems and promote technological development and advancement in our current society so instead of being irrational and selfish we should put it in something worths of its name. Sorry for deviating from the topic it is just that it pains me when I see our good and useful resources being wasted for irrelevant things.
AI should not be able to mimic the work or style of others. When someone uses another person's style or work, that work should be acknowledged and credit should be given to the original creator. In some ways, this will lessen clashes or fights between the rightful owner and the person who used it. If someone copies my work without giving me proper credit, I will be disappointed, as will I'm sure others, because a lot of time and effort would have gone into creating or designing such work. Rules for Al-generated art should be established in the same way that we have copywrite laws for music and the like.
According to me, AI is the use of machines like computers to do work . It has advantages like reduction of human error which means you can do more than one piece of work at the same time, although it has many advantages, it has a bad side too, like replicating human voices which are used to buy goods by cyber hackers on the black market in unknown identifications and some of these goods are arms which can be used to take over governance of certain countries.
I believe AI should not copy other artists' work because some artists have dreamed of being stars their entire lives, and if AI steals or copies another artist's work and makes it in another version, it may ruin other artist work and such artist's dream may never be realized, resulting in the ruining or marring of an artist's inspiration. People will become more lazy and greedy as a result of AI.
I think that AI generated art is art, unlike some. Why? Take a look at abstract art. I once did a survey, in which one of the questions was: is abstract art art indeed? Most people think so, and if it qualifies as art then AI generated art must because it is still an interpretation of a thought without using words. Abstract art is an interpretation which some people think is less clear; those same people would say that AI art is clearer. Thus it must qualify as art.
However, AI generated art must not be allowed in certain art competitions. It's like entering a poem which you haven't written, or submitting a science project which you haven't made. Even if you've told the AI what to paint, then the product isn't yours. There should be a law which meant AI generated products must be stamped, just as most images are with the logos of Albany or Livestock. This would mean it would be possible to enter a competition of AI, which would basically be a competition of artistic ideas, as the execution would be invariable.
This would effectively solve the problem while benefiting from new ideas.
Is it an art that relies in performance on abstract shapes and models that distance itself from the resemblance of figures and visuals in their natural and realistic image, and one of the characteristics of abstract art? Characteristics of abstract art The freedom to represent objects and scenes far from reality and without the need to clarify a real concept and Although abstraction dates back to prehistoric arts, in its contemporary sense it appeared at the beginning of the twentieth century by a group of photographers and sculptors of different nationalities, and its introductions had appeared since Neo-Impressionism, where the artist dared to break up the realistic image into patches of primary and complementary colors and believed of abstract art methods?Gestural abstract art: This type depends on the way the painting is drawn without caring about its subject, and on the different types of other non-abstract arts that adopt an approach in how to paint artistic paintings. to Jackson Pollock.
Artificial Intelligence and art is such a dangerous topic to discuss. This involves replicating human intellectual processes using machines. Art is made by artists with a talent of drawing. As we speak, AI has entered the Art Industry which is good because it designs drawings better than humans. But there are some negative facts that we have seen in this industry.
First of all, lack of creativity. This means artists of the next generation will become idle. This mean s they will become jobless. We all know that art is a talent . Introducing AI has caused many artists to steal the data of others for example;
If I am an artist,and I design my drawing and another one comes as if he wants a copy to design his/ hers. Instead of creating his/hers, he/she goes and edits the drawing using AI. Kindly, is it fair?
I think that AI should be able to copy other artists' styles but on the condition that they get the approval of the artist first, I think so because the AI could produce a better version of the artwork, and it could even bring a different Idea and combine it with the original to make something better.
A way that AI can get the approval of the artist is for the person operating the AI to send a message to the original artist saying he wants to use his style.
I think that the art of an artist should be never compared with the art of AI . This comparison is unfair . I believe that AI can give me quick and very unexpectable nice works . AI does not feel tired when it does things . AI uses the database it has in its ram . On the other hand, the art of an artist is full of feelings and emotions . The artist feels very tired when he does something because he makes his mind , his own intelligence , his own imagination and creativity . I think that is the content of the topic . I think everyone uses the AI to get any piece of art should mark it with special sign to tell others that it is done by the AI . So, we keep the artist's rights and to make them more satisfied and appreciated.
This way , we can show others which is inspiration and which is stealing .
Do you agree with me ?
I feel like AI should not be the copy of another person's work because it was someones creativity that you also should be creative enough to make your own work instead of copying other people's work. Some artists can take it to heart if you copy their work without permission and also they may say you stole their creativity.
I feel like copying other artists AI work should be banned but you can use their ideas cause if you copy other artists work nothing new will be created everyone will just be repeating the same thing and that also will make people not to be creative. If everyone does not copy any artist work but tries to be creative i think that will help and we will have different AI work to choose from. But if you want to copy another artist work don't plagiarize the person's work and add your creativity to the artists work I feel that will help and also develop people's creativity instead of being lazy and copying an artist work.
I don't think other artist work should be copied because it may make the original owner angry and also because how will people know if the art was done by an artist, won't people think it was done by the AI making the AI take all the glory for what someone did? so i think there should be a rule that if AI wants to use peoples art the person's name should be written so that people know that it is the person's art work.
I think AI shouldn't "copy" your work without giving you credit. I say this because if someone's work is used without their permission, they won't get the appropriate rewards for their work and have no control over the use of their creations.
I would be furious if my work gets copied, especially if they get more attention than I did. I'd immediately take up legal action.
The only rules I'd say to be put in place are copyright laws, no use of vulgar expressions, no provocative expressions and religious or cultural practices shouldn't be criticized or mocked.
I don't think we should only focus on the human creator aspect. Other artist might also claim that this is their work whereas it was completely AI or it is a collaborator. In as much as there are rights for human artists I still think there should be rights for AI.
Should there be any rules for AI-generated art? Yes, there must be rules so that artificial intelligence does not enter our lives, in addition to the dangers of artificial intelligence, so there must be rules for art created with artificial intelligence so that it does not take away the art of humans so that it does not enter and affect our lives and work to hinder our lives because if it does not There are no rules that artificial intelligence will interfere in the fields and status of artists and their work
I think digital art is copyright infringement
As happened in the “Mourishu” exhibition in the Netherlands, which combines copies made by amateurs when displaying a version developed by artificial intelligence in the framework of a competition organized by this exhibition, in which it called on the public to send their copy of the famous painting with a golden earring. The drawing was chosen from among approximately 3,500 drawings.
But it sparked great controversy in the Netherlands, where one artist described it as an incredible disgrace and insult
But it's artificial intelligence, so what's new!?
I do not know what to say because I have a point of harm from the two, so I think that it is not fair to take the right of another person, as this is considered a crime that is punishable, and I believe that this is a law. When we take something from a person’s book or a Quranic verse, we put a sign and say that we were brought from a certain side, and I believe that it is not obligatory. Take the right of someone because he has worked hard and you take the simplicity of his work and my other point of view is that it is possible that this writer is not famous and the writers are famous for him and they care about him but the most logical and does not cause harm or violation or copyright is to tell the author of the book
If the creator did not make any money from the AI painting, would this change your mind?
Yes, this is what he achieved, but he must say before taking it from Al, because this is considered cheating and he will be punished for it and he will lose money Questions asked by others Writing in the world is not profitable in the world, and literature in particular does not make its owner money. This appears in the clearest form for novice writers, who are not famous, who may have to “pay” money to publishing houses to get their (at least) first author to the public. He lives two lives - an ordinary life like the others, and an exhausting creative life that drains his energies and is very different from the lives of ordinary people. Literature fills a writer's life, not only during the hours he writes. Literature supersedes all other work. To devote himself, his time, and his energy to literature, and it seems that writers and authors are currently suffering more than othersPeople working in the creative business. But a recent survey conducted by the Authors Guild - an American professional organization for book authors - showed such an exacerbation of suffering that writing may not even be enough to make a living.
I think that he could change his mind if he did not get a commercial profit from drawing artificial intelligence, and even supposing that he made an exhibition of artificial intelligence drawings, like what YouTuber Ahmed Abu Al-Rub did, and he only sold two paintings out of 20, and it appeared to people that they were printed, but it is possible that he did not He changes his mind if he does not look at financial income only, but considers it better than human art
I sincerely believe that AIs should not be permitted to facsimile other artists' final pieces of work. The reason being that artists like Van Gogh put an abundance of effort, an ample amount of imagination and creativity. Furthermore, artists persistently work to produce an image or portrait etc… They work day and night stirring up a thought and expanding on it to produce an alluring finished piece.
Moreover, if one was to copy my artwork, I would personally feel a hint of vexation and anger. When one copies your work, it defines that the ideas which you have generated are being taken. Over all the hatred I have on my ideas being used, I trust that stolen is a harsh and strong word. I believe that people shouldn’t ‘magpie’ people’s ideas without them being 100% sure that it is ok that another’s work is being uploaded onto someone’s system like the AI’s system.
There should be some ground rules set for the AI. First and foremost, they shouldn’t be authorized to copy one’s work before they take it. To continue, even if the artist like Vincen van Gogh has died, one can magpie their ideas, but not all, however, in the future, they shouldn’t do so.
Some good points! How might you differentiate 'magpie-ing' to copying?
Hi Jen, I sincerely trust that magpie-ing defines taking an idea without consent. However, copying means to use somebody’s ideas without authorization.
Therefore, in relation to the comment about artists' work in the AI, I believe that the people who download masterpieces and use them for their benefits, should magpie ideas if the artist is dead. Meaning that the AI could ‘magpie’ how Van Gogh drew eyes or hair but not how he drew his whole portrait, picture or image. If they did so, this would be classified as copying.
Beginning.....Hello 👋
➡️Not taking artists' consent is considered stealing their art and this is wrong ❌For every artist who works hard on his art..
➡️Although artificial intelligence is important in the development of art..but it must also be respected. Appreciating the feelings of those whose art is taken without permission...
➡️ Personally, if my work is taken without my permission, I can file a case against the company that manufactured this program....
➡️ And if artificial intelligence wants any work, the manufacturer should take it Permission from the employer...
➡️Sometimes employers accept because they think positively about giving their work to a company....or artificial intelligence...🤖❤
🔚The permission is important even if the requester is artificial intelligence or A machine or even a human being...
Finally......Bye
Thank you...😁
I would feel very angry if he copied my art closely without my knowledge This is an example of theft Really what if he asked my permission I would have shared it myself But also he should rely on himself But this is theft of my efforts Who puts all his effort into creativity Like the one who copies I don't think he should Allowing artificial intelligence to copy the style of any other artist that they can use positively and make their own artwork, there is no error in artificial intelligence unless it steals someone else's effort, and among the most famous authors is the author of science fiction stories: Isaac Asimov،Thank you 😊
Well , taking a deep thinking at this topic I think there is nothing wrong with copying,as long as best practices are followed, imitation is not the form to copy,but the sincerest form of learning, almost every artists journey begins with imitating other artists,not just to imitate but to learn and as time goes on it leads them to explore and discover their own style.
I agree with you that a novice artist begins by imitating and simulating artists' drawings. I love drawing since my childhood. I learned drawing by redrawing beautiful pictures from the internet and imitating them.. I would feel angry if I were famous and my creativity was stolen by someone using artificial intelligence and published without my permission, but from another side. If I am a creative artist at the beginning of my career and I do not find the support to become famous, then I will be happy if I am discovered by a company that uses artificial intelligence and uses my style and ideas in drawing so that it gives me an amount of money for every idea and the work is not published in my name .. Here I will find a source of income and my drawings will become famous And then I can make my own way and complete my artistic career 🌹
I disagree because... many artists feel angry because their livehoods are being replaced by machines that can do the same job cheaper and without union fees. The machines can do the art faster and change it but not after the artist puts effort and hard work to make the artwork. How would I feel generally I would be annoyed by someone stealing my art and making profit from my work ,they need to ask for permission to avoid unnecessary conflicts between AI art and Human art
a)An AI system requires clean data base quality and constant conrol by AI experts.
b)AI should not discriminate the art work done by peole.
c)AI should seek for permission before using the style and art work
I think Al shouldn't be able to copy other people's art,why? Because they sometimes spend their time over their hard work, and i know people that made art wouldn't be happy when they figure out that someone has been copying, people should learn to make their own art so they will be very proud of it and of course it will be unique and people will like it, but when you copy someone's art you might not be very proud of making it since you know it isn't actually yours.
And when someone closely copied something I had made i wouldn't feel honoured exited or flattered I would feel angry knowing that my hardship at work was then used by someone else to make his or her work better. Therefore, it is imperative always to seek permission in order to maintain fairness and respect within the creative industry.
So due to this kind of irresponsible and impulsive manner rules be put in place for AI-generated art
1) the product of a generative AI model cannot be copyrighted.
2) Obtaining the consent of artists before reproducing their artwork.
Therefore people will stop copying the work of Al
It is always essential to ask permission and give appropriate credit where applicable in order to maintain fairness and respect within the creative industry. I would feel very privileged if a request was made for my permission before any of my work was reproduced. This opportunity will enable me to share my creations with a wider audience, which will lead to an increased level of appreciation and appreciation for my efforts
I think that AI art is a very volatile concept and that to help it improve it does need human interaction. If people were to just give it permission to use their work I think it would be better for the AI and humans. As you mentioned, artists are having their work put in AI databases without their permission, and this is only going to cause the hate for AI to grow and the harm against human livelihoods to grow as well. You made a very good comment and I enjoyed reading all of the points you made.
No AI shouldn't be able to copy other artist's styles because the thing that make artist's art special and valuable is their unique art style so if an AI copies other artists unique style it won't be special again, since anyone can use the style now.
I would feel angry if someone closely copied something that i made because i created it with my own special and unique style, I will feel i have wasted my time and creativity while someone would just lazy around, copy my art work and get credit and famous for what he/she didn't work for. So if someone closely copied my creative work it would be a violation of my privacy and hard work.
Yes their should rules put in place for AI generated art. For example if one creates art using AI and its a copied work, the work should not be posted as an origanal art rather it should be indicated that its a creativity made from the original artist since the creator made it himself and the AI uses the method of other artists to make it . Also if the person that posted the art work claims to have create it , he should be exposed and his work should not be published.
Artificial intelligence made our lives easier for us. Before the era of artificial intelligence came, we used to wait many weeks for the message to reach the other person, but when the era of intelligence came, we waited for many weeks, but in seconds the message was sent to the other person
I believe that artificial intelligence should not be able to copy the styles of other artists because that will cause him many problems because artificial intelligence in general is known to solve complex problems, so no one He becomes using it, and this remains from my point of view. For example, if someone steals my idea or topic, I will feel angry. This is from my tiredness and effort. This is the idea of artificial intelligence, so it must contain new ideas that are not even known. More people use it, so its advantages outweigh its disadvantages
I think that AI should be able to copy other artists styles only if it has permission since it'll make it more human and realistic if based off someone, but if it doesn't get permission then it shouldn't be used as people don't want their hard work being able to be created by an AI for free or without mentioning the Artist. Rules should be in place for the AI since some AI can easily find your information and maybe making the AI more human will scare people and think that the AI is stealing information. Older or people not that educated in modern tech may be confused or scared if an AI started chatting to them and may think its scary. On Snapchat they added an AI feature but its not removable and stays at the top of your chats and doesn't go away, but they should make it a feature to remove it.
Inspiration... or stealing?
I think that it is stealing because the AI goes on the web and take some images and makes a new one so I think it is stealing because some of these images are copyrighted by the artist and some artist might not now where there art is used and if it go viral on Twitter or Instagram the artist will get no credit. So I think it is stealing without permission.
Personally, I completely disagree with the concept of AI art. Many artists around the world take years to refine their own art to their full potential, and it can really damage an artist to see something create a copy of their work and style. AI artwork is, by definition, images or other works created by artificial intelligence, and although AI art is beautiful, and it can completely be used well without damaging anyone, many people can effortlessly mimic a creators' works without negative consequence. I believe that AI art creation shouldn't be as convenient and easy to create, such as how it is now, and perhaps only certain, trusted people should be allowed to create. While AI art creators do make beautiful, maybe stunning pieces, they should definitely not be considered as artists.
As a young student who doesn't have much experience with AI, personally believe it is too smart and often taken advantage of, for example ChatGPT. ChatGPT has often been used by students to write their essays for them with no proof that an AI actually wrote it, as it is almost completely original and is basically just a lot of information mashed into an essay. As AI is becoming more popularized around the globe, more people are starting to use it, which could mean more plagiarism. AI can take voices from people and use that, or take people artwork, for example the winner of the 2023 photography award, and if someone gets too ahead of themselves by taking this from people with AI, they could face consequences. Boundaries should be set for AI as some people can't set the boundary for themselves, because AI is being used too much to plagiarize and it's getting out of hand.
Though there is not very much good things to say about AI, one I could suggest is that people can learn a lot from them, as AI have information fed into them. For example, someone could be struggling with their science homework, and ask an AI about a certain topic they are stuck on. Although there is already many websites online for that, an AI could help simplify it if someone asks, and some people can't find exactly what they need to know on the internet, so they can specify it with the AI.
Overall, I do think that some laws should be set about the boundaries of AI, as it is too advanced and takes work people have spent weeks or months on in a couple of seconds.
Artificial Intelligence is becoming a really powerful and occasionally useful tool in recent times. However there is much controversy on if its fair. My opinion is that it is really exciting, the myriad of things that AI can do is utterly unbelievable. It can write songs, craft essays, take inspiration from admired artists and create art out of a single picture. 2023 is the year of the metaverse and alongside that we will see a rise in AI too. However, what people are making with Artificial Intelligence is not right.
Taking the example of the song made using Drake and TheWeeknd's voices is not equitable in the slightest. It got took down by violating copyright laws. By this situation alone we should clearly be able to see that doing this is not right. It's practically stealing. In simplified terms, that is using other peoples voices for a purpose that doesn't benefit them. Drake and The Weeknd were not getting earning money from that song; all the revenue would be going to the person who made it. Imagine how much money would be made from having similar ideas!
The definition of art is ' the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination...'. The key word here is, 'human'. Due to this definition, we can infer that art is human-made, when it is produced by Artificial Intelligence however; it's not art.
The infinite things that the AI can do seems implausible! However, it could be even greater if its purpose is directed at more useful and life-aiding things: instead of stealing peoples original ideas.
I think ai can be both inspiration and stealing depending on how you use it. Ai can use its technology to make inspiration for other artists such as making examples of anatomy and background for art and creating chords for music. However, ai doesn't create it takes from others without permission and uses it as its own. its very simple to use and only needs a couple of clicks and then you can upload it. People make money from ai generated music and art and claim it as their own. There are many accounts on apps such as Instagram which get notice and fans from art which isn't their work but the originals artists and ai. The use of ai can also make jobs less needed and more competitive as ai can make code for apps and make lyrics for music. I think ai can be used but should only use from sources that agree or not be able to be download or saved.
I personally disagree with the usage of AI arts. AI ( or artificial intelligence) is made to adapt and learn the way we speak, draw , etc. Using AI and claiming it is yours is not OK. Most of the time, AI takes art from famous artists ranging from older, famous artists; such as Vincent Van gogh and some smaller artists such as Thumin or Samdoesarts. People who use AI arts are NOT artists, they're using stolen art aspects of other artists hard work, hours go into their works and they learn in art schools (sometimes) so they're wasting their time expanding their skills and wasting their money to attend school or pay for tablets / tools to boost their skills , while their efforts and skills get stripped away and to be plagiarized by a bot. However, AI is showing improvements and the advancing of our society. I believe if AI asked for consent from the artists there would be a little less controversy over it, but to get consent from every photo on the internet is practically impossible so there is not much anyone can do about it.
summary;
AI art is forever advancing and everyone wants to have the best AI , but it will never be done in an ethical way that supports the artists its stealing from. The usage of AI art doesn't make you an artist, it makes you a plagiarist since you are stealing from others artists and then ( not in every case , but 9 times out of 10 it is) posted on the internet and claimed as your own.
Art is a talent that not everyone has so if yo are struggling, take some time to practice or just give it up if you can't , its better than stealing art.
Thank you for listening to my opinion.
Personally, AI scares me because we don't know much about it. This is artificial intelligence and personally chat bots are fine, they can even be fun but what happens when you take this bot that can give conversations like a person and make it into a walking robot?
I also think that AI art can take away the worth of really putting your emotions into a piece of work; this is AI it has no emotion. There are a lot of videos on YouTube where they get a song then use AI to sample an artist's voice to cover it. I think it's alright to use art if a person gives permission ,just like a cover of a song, also if the original artist is credited . What is not okay is when you take an artists piece or style and copy it especially, when you gain money from it. Basing off something is okay but AI doesn't have to copy the entire style, it just lacks the imagination required to create this art and make it original.
Personally, I think that it is stealing in a way as they are pretty much replicating pieces of art and sending it out, but they can work around the copyright laws and create a similar but not fully alike.
On the other hand, it is just getting inspiration and style from the already made pieces of art. The AI's are just working around the ideas and inspiration already created.
I believe that AI shouldn't really be allowed unless it can find a work around the copyright laws but using well known artist names or voices because then you are just using them for personal gain while most would never do such a thing. Also in the world of physical art, many could use the AI to create authentic works of art from some of the biggest artists of all time they could sell it on making it seem real there by committing fraud and no-one would be able to stop them. The only thing to tell them apart would be the stroke patterns but most wouldn't be able to tell the difference of the stroke patterns. I believe chat GPT should also be banned because many are using it to cheat on things like essays and tasks assigned like that. It makes less of a reward for all the hard work it would usually take, it makes getting a degree that much easier. please correct me if i wrong but this is my fully supported view point on this
I do not support artificial intelligence so that the title of artist cannot be attributed to someone who uses artificial intelligence. I believe that artificial intelligence does not need human intelligence, but rather lacks human creativity and kills their creativity. Instead of this so-called artificial intelligence, let us go back 50 years when people’s lives were beautiful and they were smart Their life is based on thinking and experimentation. Why do we forget that there is artificial intelligence and live like them a primitive life, in which there are no machines that lack human creativity, and we discover people who have creative thinking. for you
The mind is a gift to man, he must exploit it, think and develop his abilities. Other than that, machines cannot be intelligent on their own or develop their intelligence like a human.
A person who relies on his mind and experiences and develops himself, in my opinion, is much better than artificial intelligence
I agree with you, artificial intelligence is a digital technologyIt has its negatives and positives, but I see that its negatives outweigh its positives. Some of its negatives include not expressing an opinion, reaching the required message, not thinking, creating, experimenting, and many other things. Among its positives is that it made it easier for us, as ordinary people, to strive and become like artists through training, experimentation, taking knowledge and gaining experiences. All of this requires a healthy mind, and a healthy mind exists in a healthy body (a well-known saying in our country), meaning that if you properly exploit the use of artificial intelligence, you become more focused on life, living, and adapting to it.I will add to my opinion that I also prefer artificial intelligence, but for a short period of time, so I advise everyone to protect themselves from excessive communication, and finally I hope that I have reached my opinion, thank you.
These are great questions that I will answer
1 I do not think that artificial intelligence is allowed to imitate the artistic style of other artists because it is considered theft because the artist did not agree to that and I do not see in him the wonderful Plummer because the paintings will be repeated and with the passage of time the paintings will become boring and also if someone wants to benefit from drawing artificial intelligence he will paint in the same way If you are someone else, you won't have multiple talents and discover new arts
2 If someone copied my work I would definitely be angry. For example, I was in a competition, and there was another girl who copied the same drawing as me, but with some modifications, and she won. I will definitely get angry. I will also consider it a theft
3 Laws must be made. If it is not put in place, many problems will occur, including accusations of stealing and imitating ideas, and artificial intelligence may get out of human control, if laws are not put in place.
In my opinion, I think we should set rules for AI-generated art because this is not real art
Likewise, the actions and words of others should not be imitated and reproduced, because some of them will be wrong, so make your own personality style different and take care of yourself without having to imitate others.
I will feel angry if the person had not asked for permission before venturing to copy my work. This person might even end up getting more credit than me. I mean who in their right senses would copy someone’s hard work? This simply means they want to get rich in a lazy way. It’s simply plagiarism which is unacceptable. If however, they ask for permission before copying, I just might feel honoured because it goes a long way to show that my work is appreciated and I am being recognized and respected.
I will feel angry because they did not take permission, and I think there should be a rule that guards artists against AI stealing, the penalty being serving a Jail term. This should help check the crime of artwork plagiarism by AI.
I do not think that AI should be allowed to copy other artists because it is an offensive crime which is a forgery and punishable by law. Also, if AI is allowed to copy artists, there is every possibility that given some time, there may not be any use of human artists which could be another setback to humanity especially since they produce what I would consider “fake work”.
I will feel angry if someone closely copied something I had made. It would be a wasted effort on my side, having to use my time and resources and then someone copies it as their own work and gets to be applauded or even enriched by it. Every person was created to be creative so I think everyone can come up with something spectacular if they try and not have to copy another person’s work.
AI is no good in my opinion. This is because people who naturally imagine and draw some work of art using their hands would begin to rely on Ai until eventually, laziness sets in. Both mental and physical laziness are the risks, eventually. The fact that it copies other people’s work makes it even worse. Finally, the person whose work is being copied may not be happy.
I think that AI should not be allowed to copy another artist’s work. If they have to draw, they should draw from scratch as an artist would and not have to copy another’s work. This is so that there would be a clear cut distinction between artificial intelligence and natural intelligence.
I will feel honoured if someone copies something that I had made. It only goes to show that the person is happy with my work or likes it. People hardly copy what would not be appreciated by others or to put it in another way, people only copy excellence so if I am copied, it means I have done an excellent job.
I think that Al can copy people arts , but with some rules, like take permission from the person who invent this art , or write that the Al has taken this art from its owner , like this artist will have their rights , and Al published the people arts in sush as a way as to prevent people from attacking him or even asking for his abolition
Where there is no law, there is no sin, so I say, Yes. There should be rules put in place for AI generated art. Some of the rules are as follows:
1. AI should be allowed to copy other people's work, only after they have asked and have been given permission from the owner of the work to be copied.
2. Any person who uses AI to generate artwork should not be called an artist. Instead, a new name can be carved out for such persons.
After reading all these comments, it got me thinking,
A lot of you say that AI should not be allowed to copy the art styles of other people. But some artists may choose to willingly allow people copy their art for payment called royalties. Does this mean that artists can make the decision to allow their work be copied?
Also, a lot of human paintings make us feel a particular type of emotion when we see them and we can easily relate to them because it was painted by one of us. Does AI art give us the same type of feeling and relatability we feel when we see human art?
I think that AI should not be able to copy other artists' style because AI is a technology that was made to make drawing more faster and easier, but people are are using this technology to their advantage, some artists may be unaware that their work are used, some artists think that it is OK to use their art work, but while some think that it is unfair that AI can use other artists styles without their permission. On this hub we are talking about inspiration and stealing, we have to balance this discussion, if AI keeps on taking other artists artwork, isn't that stealing? rules should be put in place but the other artists that have no idea that their work is used, do they feel bad or good. If someone closely copied what I have made, and I knew when the person copied me I will feel happy because the person is using what I have created, in my mind I will feel proud of myself, but if someone copied what I wrote I will not feel happy, especially when you claim it as yours, despite knowing that it is mine, I will be very angry, I will definitely give you if you ask with an open mind, I told you what I feel, but what about the other artists that they use their art without their permission. Rules should definitely be put in place to avoid all this.
you make good points, blissful_lobster -- but what kind of rules could be put in place? It is often difficult to distinguish when an artwork has "been inspired" by another, versus when it has been actually copied in some way... How can rules help when there is not a clear distinction?
In my own opinion, AI should not the ability to copy artists styles because, if AI had the ability to copy artists styles, they will have all the credict, AI will start to have the ability to steal other people's artwork. AI will start to look bad in the eyes of artists. This is not good, why should AI have the ability to copy artists styles. There's a saying that goes like this, you rip what you sew. AI should not have the ability to copy artists styles. If someone were to copy your work, how will you feel? Very angry. Why should someone copy your work when had worked hard with all your strength then someone get all the credict for it. It will not be fair to me. Yes, rules should be put in place, because AI needs to have their limits, in order not have problems with artists and their hard work.
Whether or not AI should be able to copy other artists' styles is a matter of debate. Some argue that it is a form of plagiarism or theft of intellectual property, while others view it as a legitimate artistic tool that can be used to pay homage to and learn from great artists of the past.
OK decisive_bell -- but what about your view? Do you think AI should be able to copy other artists’ styles? Why or why not?
Artists say AI image generators are copying their style to make thousands of new images. This is literally STEALING all these AI machines are not given the permission to copy but they it anyway and go away with it which tends to affect the human artist's.
I will be so honored and excited if someone copies my work but only under the condition that I am being asked.
Yes, rules should be set in fact LAWS be should be put in place of AI generated art enforced. To me, copying is just a way to cover up for stealing . For example AI machines copying thousand of art works is just to crafty they obviously didn't have time to asks thousands of people for permission before '' copying'' their work . Instead of referring to it as copying I prefer we call it stealing. I think because of this rules should be set aside for all this shenanigans .
In general, the emotional response to such situations will depend on various factors, including the context in which the copying occurs, the individual's attachment to the original work, and their personal values and beliefs around creativity, innovation, and intellectual property.
I,myself, may have different reactions to someone closely copying something I have made. I may feel angry or frustrated that my inspiration has been taken and my original ideas have been copied without proper attribution or permission. Or I may appreciate the imitation and concern about the potential impact on my reputation or financial gain.
Most AI works are based on what it has been fed with, thereby making the work not to be original. It, therefore makes people lazy and not creative about their designs. An artist is a progenitor of a particular concept be it the composition of a musical piece, artwork, etc. Someone who uses AI can not be regarded as an artist because the idea is not original. It is a product based on someone else's previous work. You can compare AI to AI works but regarding it as genuine work is preposterous. How will you feel if someone copies your work? Outrageous! Okay, how do you explain the case of a literature student who wrote his poetry assignment using CHATGPT? These are the concerns. It will promote mediocrity and numb creativity.
Do you not think artists are continually being inspired by the work of others, incorporating that inspiration into their own work? Does that make it copying?
Copying another artist's work can be a wonderful way to learn, get inspired, get ideas, honor an influence you love, and create something new. All art is a mash up of ideas, and we can all influence and inspire each other, so long as we are creating and sharing from a place of honesty and transparency.Another way to take inspiration from another artist is to take what's inspiring you (a color palette, a mark, a composition style, etc.) and put your own spin on it. This means that you copy that aspect, but not before you alter it in some way. This puts your individual stamp on it.
Most artists find inspiration by getting out of the studio and observing the world around them. This could mean going to a coffee shop, walking in the park while listening to some inspirational music, or watching people.
An inspired writer adds something fresh to their writing, even if they borrow ideas. On the other hand, a plagiarist replicates the work of another individual. The creative process does not conclude with inspiration generation.
I
t is legal to copy anything. It is illegal to sell, publicize and publish a copy of an artwork unless you have prior permission from the copyright owner. It is also illegal to publish and sell an artwork that's substantially similar to another original work of art.
In my own opinion, i feel that AI art-generating models are not directly stealing other's artwork or images to create their own, they just use them to learn. Well, AI should be allowed to derive their styles from other artist styles, but it will be illegal to present the work as being original. AI should attribute the art as having been copied from another person's work of art. According to my research ''Since AI art is created by algorithms, computers, and cross-wired information gathered over time, there is no one artist of a single AI art piece. By that logic, an AI art piece cannot be copyrighted by typical copyrighting standard practices.''
I think more than ever before, the scope of Plagiarism should be expanded to cover people who use AI to duplicate people's work. If they want to organize AI to AI musical composition, artwork competitions, etc, like Battle Bots, fair enough. But works created using AI are not original. The truth is that AI has come to stay with us, therefore, the earlier we put rules and regulations guiding its use the better, this has become more important.
I think artists' styles are not supposed to be copied because they have done their best to express and invent them so that the computer can easily take them. Therefore, AI must be programmed at this point.
2- I think my feelings will be mixed and different from this feeling
1 Anger when it isn't obvious to people that I wrote it and worked so hard on it
2 Joy because it might be an important and wonderful topic to share with others
3 pride, because I was an active member of the community, because if it were not for the important topic, the person would not have shared it
3 Yes, technical rules should be established in the field of artificial intelligence, such as:
Not to imitate any pictures drawn by artists and other things that pose a threat to artists
AI should not be allowed to copy artists styles and even if they do they should be given the permission to go ahead with it.
AI illustration continues to make inroads in the manga, anime and video game industries and has now begun to replace human artists in China.
The app that uses Artificial intelligence to generate self protaits is stealing artist content.
I would feel the rage of anger and I would feel displeased if someone closely or not copied something I had made and even if the person had to the person ought to have consent to do so.
And yes, rules should be laid down for AI because under current case law, AI-generated art is not eligible for copyright protection, and is therefore in the public domain.
The AI user would never have a clue, having no intimate awareness of the images used in the dataset by a trained artists that spent a lot of time and hardwork on a drawing would know what he/she has done.
Therefore, as we shift our values to caring more about the human intent and human intent element in art then AI would pose no threat to artists.
It has been the posture of the U.S. copyright office that there is no copyright protection for works created by non-humans, including machines, therefore, the product of a generative AI model cannot be copyrighted and also thee issues have intensified debate around to the extent to which we can credit AI with creativity.
Is AI arts better than human creation?
No, i think human creation are better than AI arts but to begin with What Is AI?
AI (Artificial Intelligence) are highly sophisticated android programmed to behave like humans. The reason why i said human creations are better is because AI can only create images based on the data they have been trained or programmed on, also AI lack emotions so their creations won't have much touch unlike human creation which are based on their feelings or emotions and due to all this their creation may take longer to produce and they become more beautiful and meaningful. Even an artist named Boris Eldagsen is also against the arts of AI.
And other reasons why i said human arts are better is because they are based on emotions and feelings but AI arts lack the touch of humans due to their lack of emotions, also an AI may be able to produce arrangements of drawing materials such as paint, brushes, 3D objects e.t.c , but it won't feel what human feel their inspiration and their experience of life when creating art. Humans arts are one of a kind and also distinctive......
I do not think AI should be able to copy other artists' styles. This is because it would make the artist's work less rare and wanted. If AI are able to copy an artist's style, the original artist's work would not be favored much anymore, since it is common. I would not feel good if someone had copied my work because I had worked hard on it. If it is copied by someone else, my work would no longer be special. In my opinion, there should be rules put in place to limit AI-generated art. This can reduce the amount of problems that may occur when AI are copying other artists' work.
I do not think AI should be able to steal other artists art work, it is unfair how people spend hours, days or even weeks on a piece of art just for some robot to steal it and take all the credit, it is very unfair.
Can a robot or AI steal? Do you have to make the decision to steal for example, AI is instructed by humans after all...
I saw your question and it was very nice and I wanted to answer it
Yes, artificial intelligence can steal, for example
He painted a beautiful painting without thanking its painter, and thus he would have stolen everything for the painter, such as his fatigue, thanks and appreciation, and this would lead to the retirement of human art, and thus threaten the arts
AI may make the right decisions based on facts, but may lack the empathy that needs to be part of those decisions. We still need humans in the middle to assess the value of insights and decisions to the welfare of humans, businesses and communities.
The study, recently published in Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World , found that only 14% of workers say they've seen their job replaced by a robot. But those who have experienced job displacement due to a robot overstate the effect of robots taking jobs from humans by about three times.
What is AI decision making? AI decision making is when data processing – like analyzing trends and suggesting courses of action – is done either in part or completely by an AI platform instead of a human to quantify data in order to make more accurate predictions and decisions.
Efficiency. Certainly robots far outperform humans in terms of efficiency. As long as necessary systems and data are available, they can work around the clock, 24/7. Especially in cases where the work to be done piles up, robots show their real superiority in this regard.
Yes they can since it is already up on the internet where the robot/AI can find it and change a few things about it like for example Background, Hair, Eyes and others. Yes AI/robots were created by Humans but can’t humans steal and take the credit too?
I don't think that AI should be able to use or copy the work of other artists, if the artwork is not released as public domain (ie. how artwork becomes public domain about 5o years after the death of the artist if no relatives or copyright owners of the artwork say otherwise) or without the artist's knowledge. I would feel a bit frustrated if someone closely, or directly copied something I made, especially without my permission, which is the case of the vast majority of these AI works.
I agree because... If someone were to copy my work, take credit for it and earn more approval than me I would be furious. AI copies art from artists, take credit for it then get more likes and approval than the artist. This makes them furious making the artist feel unwanted. Artist feel that AI does not make art but just made the ability to create unethical art a billion times faster and easier to do. Asking the AI to make art in the style of a famous artist could be seen as unethical. AI art also invalidates the hard work of real artists.
Artists are not the only ones affected by AI. Everyone who posts a selfie online is also affected, since these AI’s search the whole internet for source collection, it is entirely possible for people's pictures to be used regularly with a lack of consent. Which people might see as a violation of their privacy
Personally, i think AI's should NOT copy other individuals styles of art. For starters, someone would of spent time an thought into creating their work. Secondly, AI's reproduce artists' work and certainly do not give credit what-so-ever.The AI's wouldn't of had any sympathy for them and would of taken all credits to themselves. If an AI copied my art, i would be quite resentful as time,money and thought was put into the designing. Overall, i think AI's should be stopped from stealing other individuals creations, especially without credits towards the original creator.
Do you think AI should be able to copy other artists' styles? Why and why not? My answer is no; Because the person who copies the work of others does not have a mind of his own, but depends on the minds and ideas of others. For example: artificial intelligence does not have a mind of its own, it designs based on what it has been programmed to do, or based on the information in the private database. with it. Most artists use artificial intelligence to achieve the best result with the help of a computer. Ideas of renewing or transforming art are from the mind of the artist. I think the best way to paraphrase your statement is "If artificial intelligence can modify or design any form of art, would ordinary artists be needed?"
An artist will still be required to create new ideas and versions, The shapes of the music will be programmed into the artificial intelligence so that any artist can work on it. There will be space for people, and more artists will be needed. It scales quickly when an artist produces something with AI, everyone will rush to it online, so more people will be needed to produce more illumination of the art world without the use of AI.
For me to use artificial intelligence by copying another artist's work without my permission it is wrong and I will feel angry if my work is stolen or copied because in my view this is theft and rules should be established for the art that is created and I see that the copied work lacks the emotional depth that is It comes from the artist's personal experience. And artificial intelligence copying the artwork reduces the originality of the work, and also artificial intelligence has the ability to create unique and diverse artworks because the scope of art is wide and unlimited, artificial intelligence must be subject to laws and rules to ensure that plagiarism and theft in art do not threaten other artists and the work of artists Their work rest assured that their work is not threatened with copying and theft.
I think that AI should not copy the styles of other artists because, I know that the owner made the designs out of his own thinking and imagination, so I think it is wrong copying. I hate whenever a seatmate spies my assignment and I shout that the person should stop, I see it as an exploitation of a person's sense of reasoning.
Rules! Rules! Rules! They should be generated to make sure that an artists design is not made use of just for free or for the fun of it.
I think AI should be allowed to use other artists' styles because everything, that came from an idea, took inspiration from another. Thing don't simply "pop" into your head, they're formed over time, and as you continue to take in information and consume content, your idea slowly begins to grow and grow, becoming more plausible and realistic. Everything is a derivative of another. Take for example Elvis Presley, a person who achieved an insane amount of success, was inspired by older black artists such as Sister Rosetta Thorpe and B.B. King.
While the AI piece is not a direct copy, it does take “inspiration” from the art it was trained with. Often art is about meshing together styles and techniques to create something new, so it is difficult to view this purely as copying other artists. “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.” What this adage implies is that we should take it as a compliment when someone copies our good ideas, or our personal style, or takes up one of our key interests. But in reality, most of us just end up feeling really annoyed.I think there should definitely be rules put in place for AI generated art as rules create law and order. I think rules like AI should be authorized by creators if they want to replicate their art and people who use AI should be licensed and in the vase of children either supervised or there should be an age limit to usage of AI.
I strongly disagree with your comment because the assertion that AI-generated art is merely inspired by existing art and not a direct copy is subject to question. While art often involves blending styles and techniques to create something new, it is important to recognize the distinction between inspiration and replication. The notion that imitation is the "sincerest form of flattery" oversimplifies the complexity of artists' feelings towards their work being copied. While rules and regulations can play a role in ensuring the ethical and responsible use of AI-generated art, the proposed requirement for authorization by creators and licensing for users warrants careful consideration. Additionally, while protecting children in their engagement with AI is crucial, alternative approaches beyond strict supervision or age limits should be explored. I suggest a comprehensive discussion is necessary to navigate the intricacies of artistic inspiration, imitation, and the regulation of AI-generated art. Striking a balance between respecting artists' rights and fostering transformative potential is a complex task that demands careful consideration.
It is important to establish clear quality standards and guidelines for AI-generated art to address the concerns surrounding its authenticity and originality. The development and adoption of AI in the creation of art necessitate a rigorous examination of the ethical implications and potential consequences. Ensuring the integrity of AI-generated art requires not only recognizing the rights and perspectives of artists but also engaging in collaborative discussions with stakeholders, including AI developers, art communities, and legal experts. This dialogue should strive to establish criteria that distinguish between genuine artistic expression and mere replication while fostering an environment that encourages innovation and creative exploration. Implementing transparent attribution mechanisms, supporting artists' rights through licensing frameworks, and fostering education about AI-generated art can contribute to a balanced approach that respects both the creators and the transformative capabilities of this emerging technology. In the ever-evolving landscape of AI-generated art, a thought-provoking question arises: How do we define the line between inspiration and replication, and who holds the authority to draw that line? The quest for a comprehensive understanding of the intricacies surrounding artistic inspiration, imitation, and the regulation of AI-generated art demands our unwavering attention. As we navigate this complex terrain, let us not forget the delicate balance we must strike between safeguarding artists' rights and fostering the transformative potential of AI. I believe that only through conscientious discussions, continuous refinement of standards, and a commitment to inclusivity can we ensure a future where AI and art coexist harmoniously, pushing the boundaries of creativity while respecting the integrity of the artistic process therefore I deeply disagree with your comment.
I disagree with your comment when you say "AI is not a direct copy" because the AI steals other artist's ideas and styles and then later claims it as their work without giving the artist any credit or compensation for that idea or style, therefore causing a threat to their work. I believe the AI can come up with its ideas or style to publish its songs, stories, and art, giving credit to its original artist, Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery does not seem logical to me because there is no form of respect or compensation, therefore, downgrading the original artist's hard work, sweat and soul all put in their art.
In my opinion, there is a similarity between them but there is a major difference between inspiring and stealing art. The quote "Gathering your own reference materials, sketches and using your own imagination is going to help you grow as an artist far more than stealing someone else's work." says all about stealing an art.
INSPIRATION means a feeling of enthusiasm you get from someone or something which gives you new and creative ideas. STEALING means imitating others work.
In my opinion AI art is theft but isn’t true. AI art making models is a tool which is within the hands of the user to either use them ethically or unethically. AI art generating models are not directly stealing others work to create their own, they just use them to learn.
Really I feel very angry when someone copies me. I have put my time and effort in doing it but someone with zero effort copies me. It could be triggered.It is my work and it is only mine and when someone copies my work it seems to be not my work. It seems meaningless.
Copyrights can be put as a rule or giving credits.This will not affect any other feelings and it will remain as a work whi has done it. It can be a inspiration but not stealing. Copying others work can be made illegal and they can be removed from this.
Somebody's work is somebody's work! It has to be respected! Otherwise its nothing but stealing.
1. IP is a very important topic of discussion. Otherwise, its infringement of somebody's property. Adding strings to someone's work doesnt make it as a new product. Its nothing but stealing.
There should be strict laws for using somebody's work, unless some permission is obtained! Wouldnt it be great to seek permission rather than stealing! That is what is true education is all about isnt!
Acknowledging the work of the artist before using should be mandatory and Intellectual property laws should be made much more stricter!
I think AI should not copy other artists style because the original will done with their hard work, believe and self confidence etc. If they copy the orginal style and AI will get more than the original and there is no use in there hard work and dedication. So I think AI should not copy .
I think ,I will get angry because I have made it with my lots of hard work, Time management with my other works and no sleep so on.. . So I think there will no purpose in my work.
Yes, There should rules in AI arts because they have lots of ideas and it may and may not affect some artist because of there style and there should be some limits ,It may have contain many rules also.
Copying another artist's work can be a wonderful way to learn, get inspired, get ideas, honor an influence you love, and create something new. All art is a mash up of ideas, and we can all influence and inspire each other, so long as we are creating and sharing from a place of honesty and transparency.
How will I feel if someone closely copied something I've made?
My work have there before his that's why he copied it because it inspired him and is impressed by it. This means that my work is good and I should try to improve and produce more so many people can get inspired by my work,also alot of invention where copied and then made better.
I don't think any rule should be made against AI generated art because they are only copying our artist which will make our artist more recognized. AI can help us learn, get inspired, get ideas, honor an influence you love, and create something new.
Artificial intelligence (AI) in recent times has been of great importance to humanity in term of efficiency, speed, cost among others.
Artistically, I don't think AI can completely take over real human effort. In terms of mimicking, replicating / duplicating it is fine and good - because it will save the artist time/effort.
I think it is time intellectual / copyright laws are strengthened to protect the rights of artists and possibly prohibiting a total copy without alterations.
Artists should be credited even after AI copying. Any artist whose work or style is copied should be given all the necessary credits and possible financial benefits that may come with it.
I am personally not against AI copying an Artist style/work since it will lack the ability to personalize the style completely.
I think that if you take inspiration from somebody else's art thats ok but just as long as you don't copy their idea.There is a different between inspiration and copying.With inspiration you may take some ideas from their art but still have their own ideas for their art and then combine them.But copying is taking the other artists idea entirely and not having their own idea and just using the other artists idea.Even if you are taking inspiration from other people you should sill give them credit for taking inspiration from them so the person original art be seen more since they got credit and most likely people will look at the person that took inspirations art and go look at the orginal art and make it more popular.Even if you do copy at least give credit and say that they got the whole thing from the original artist.
I personally think that ai shouldn't be authorized to copy any individual sense of style in the mean of entertainment
cause every individual works hard to produce his or her song or album and it takes them time to perfect everything that is done about the song if an ai takes that sense of style the artist will be rendered talentless because it is what the artist produces that makes them stand out and if an ai can do that their nothing special or different about the artists
if an ai has to copy my sense of style I would feel angry because my style can also be referred to as an idea because it would have taken enough effort for me to come up with that idea or style which takes hard work and that hard work is what is going to make me stand out in the midst of people
no one would like to see someone taken credit for his or her hard work
I personally think that rules and regulations should be made about coping of style
I agree that artificial intelligence should not be able to copy the styles of other artists. This is very bad. If their styles are copied, this means that the same picture will be transmitted to all countries of the world. Everyone will know that he is the one who drew it or made it. This is very terrible.
After much fatigue and working on this art closely, someone comes and copies what I made!! This is considered disrespectful to the arts and works of artists, as there is no appreciation for what he has created. Some artists consider this their livelihood. If someone copies and publishes their works, this is considered stealing and imitating the works of others, and therefore they deceive the world and themselves!!
In my opinion, rules should be established for the art created by artificial intelligence. If there are no rules and laws that will lead to the corruption of relations between people, no one likes to have their own work stolen. If someone wants to borrow someone else’s work from artificial intelligence, permission must be requested from the door Respect...
But there are some exceptions, some people copy art in order to learn from it and the art that was drawn, maybe he copied it to introduce people around the world to this person who made it, to tell them how wonderful and excellent this person's art is, and he did these things.
So yes, I am for the existence of rules for art created by artificial intelligence, in order not to spread hatred among people, because of copying works
The robot is an artist in the form of a human being, working with artificial intelligence in the world.
As a result, the gases were destroyed and the gases produced, especially by large numbers of gases.
In my opinion, photography appears to be a new branch of art that produces images that differ from the paintings of painters.
And the painters kept retiring from work, as the cameras spread out at work.
I will feel honoured to have my work copied as an artist. It makes you feel accepted and appreciated.
An artist should only be offended if they are not given the due recognition or prior notice.
Again the artist stands to benefit financially from the copyright when his/her works are copied and used by others.
Again with AI copy, artists' work can become popular and famous. Unknown/less popular artists whose works are copied and recognized can become known from that simple act of recognition!
Then again, I do not support people making an AI copy of the hard work of artists' in every field. I feel that is disrespectful even if they decide to ask permission because an artist thinks and imagines beautiful scenarios, poses, and emotions on a piece of work and for someone to just use websites on their laptops to mimic the work of artists in all fields, and then post it online or sell them, it is not fair.
The AI community though, is not completely in the wrong but I think they should try and understand the work and emotions that people put in artistry before attempting to imitate it. They can use their creativity and professional knowledge in the field to make their own masterpiece.
If i were ever an artist, i will not be happy if my copyrighted work was redone with less effort and was shared with others and even if i was asked permission I will deny it.
I'm not sure about this because... I agree with you when you disagree with the fact that Ai copy real artist's work because I see it as a form of plagiarism and I don't support it but as Ai has come to be the "ish", it is something that is being developed, scientists are still finding ways to make this invention better but I feel it can also assist young artists in many ways in terms of inspiration and many more but I think Ai should seek permission and compensate before replicating artist's works as it turns to downgrade the sales of their art, it tarnishes their image and lowers their self-esteem. I also agree with you when you it's not fully fair, Some negotiation can be done between the two to bring profit and I disagree with when you say even if you were asked permission and you work was redone with less you wouldn't be happy. I actually see it as a form of mentorship and a learning trade between an expert and amateur.
I believe that because ai can copy other artists it means that it could be used to ruin the reputation or image of a famous or undercover artists
I don't think they should 100% copy other art pieces but if they do take inspiration from them, they should give credit to the original artist. A lot of people have similar art styles so if its very un-obvious who it got inspiration from then i think its fine.
I don't think this should be allowed because the AI robot is just taking drawings with out permission of the artist. I think they should make the AI robot should stop taking others drawing. Some people use the AI robot to "make drawings saying that they did it" because now we know more about the AI it's easer to think someone could use AI and say they did it. in my opinion they should stop making the "art AI" and this is not art this is just taking someone else work and even sometime they get more likes and more followers in social media. like tik tok and instagram ect.
I think the ai should not be able to steal artists art without consent because the artist puts effort into it and it gets taken and people take the credit for it.
Different people will say different things about how they feel about this. Personally, I wouldn't mind if someone used my art... if they asked for my permission. Using an art style without permission would be considered stealing. I think the only exception could be for programmers to get companies that own artworks and such and ask to use the art styles and works as references for their AI programs, if companies were to accept this, there would be no issue and would be an innovative way to receive inspiration as an artist.
I believe AI should be able to copy other artists' styles. Human artists' do something similar to this when they take inspiration, taking elements of other artists' work and then adapting them into something of their own. If human artists' do this, then the AI ones should most certainly be allowed to access such a resource.
Artificial intelligence has many benefits and can help solve many problems and challenges in the modern world. However, AI can be used in unethical or illegal ways, which can lead to privacy and cybersecurity violations. Therefore, AI should be used responsibly and ethically, and developed in a way that ensures the protection of individual and societal rights.
Last year, a painting of Edmund Bellamy sold for $432,000.
You might find the price a bit too much, for a picture of someone you've never heard of. You will also not have heard of the artist either, as the picture was drawn by an algorithm (computational system) based on a data series, drawn from 15 thousand paintings, painted between the fourteenth and twentieth centuries.
And honestly, it's pretty lousy.
Artificial intelligence and its danger: when the machine gets "delirious"
Would you feel comfortable in a job interview with a robot?
Selling this painting for such an amount, which surprised Christie's auction house, raised many important questions. Can a computer, bereft of human emotion, be truly creative? Is this painting really a work of art? Do any of these questions really matter, if people are willing to pay money to buy them?