AI PBs
-
@MisterBoring said in AI PBs:
I often wonder how much of that has to do with news coverage. Is any reliable news source regularly covering our hobby?
LOL what? …no…
Anyway, if this was going to go anywhere in terms of litigation it would’ve come up in the 2000s when fan fiction and websites that did ‘dream casting’ for movies were just becoming things.
-
Image generation isn’t the only thing generative tech like this is being used for. It’s being used for animation, for voices, etc. Actors are fighting for their faces and voices to not be used as an AI simulacrum of themselves to put them out of work on a broad commercial scale. The creation of deepfakes and simulated representations of real people is another reason why I personally find generative learning algorithms deeply ethically concerning. That’s not necessarily a problem with Midjourney itself, and I can see why people might draw the line between a deepfake and a generated artistic rendering of an elf, or whatever. But there’s a reason I categorically dislike it.
-
It doesn’t come up because the impact is minimal. There’s no likelihood of confusion that it’s an authorized licensure and no one is making money on it. People who make money using their likeness know - assuming they know or care that online RP exists - that it does not cost them anything for their face to be used in this fashion because it is not an area of business that it would earn them any money. Essentially, is it morally correct to “steal” someone’s face for this purpose? Probably not, but also who cares? What harm exists here?
Basically if you want to use AI PBs go ahead, but this idea that it is somehow morally superior because no real people are involved is disingenuous. The only choices that are free of contention are drawing your own shit, paying to commission an artist to draw your own shit, or not using an image at all and just writing descriptions in this writing hobby. Otherwise we are all making choices that have points of compromise.
-
Speaking of litigation, who do I speak to about suing for the whiplash I got as those goalposts fuckin’ rocketed past?
-
You are paying for everything being above board. If the corporation is pulling funny business, then that’s on them (and Disney’s lawyers will undoubtedly made them pay).
That’s just not accurate. Tools like Midjourney provide absolutely no claims that they have the rights to the materials used in their training data or that the images they generate are safe from copyright or trademark infringement claims. Mainly because they don’t. That’s why there are eleventy billion lawsuits against GenAI companies from artists, authors, publishers, and more.
And EVEN IF the law concludes that training these GenAI systems on copyrighted material is fair use (which is still very much up in the air), that still doesn’t protect you if something you generate with them infringes on someone else’s copyrights or trademarks.
I can ask GenAI to make me an image of a golden space robot and slap it on a T-Shirt to sell, but that’s not going to save me from a DMCA takedown or lawsuit once Disney sees that it’s the spitting image of C-3PO.
@Third-Eye said in AI PBs:
Anyway, if this was going to go anywhere in terms of litigation it would’ve come up in the 2000s when fan fiction and websites that did ‘dream casting’ for movies were just becoming things.
That’s what I was alluding to when I mentioned fancasts/faceclaims not being unique to MUSHes. Like fanfic/fanart, there are certainly those who take issue with them. And like fanfic/fanart, they exist on shaky copyright ground, relying mainly on the good graces of the creators.
Even so, there never has been anywhere near the widespread outcry from creatives over these things than there has with GenAI. If you have a personal problem with them, that’s totally fine! But thinking that GenAI is better than fancasting because it somehow harms creatives less feels like it’s almost willfully ignoring what creatives themselves are saying.
-
