Greg Rutkowski, a digital artist known for his surreal style, opposes AI art but his name and style have been frequently used by AI art generators without his consent. In response, Stable Diffusion removed his work from their dataset in version 2.0. However, the community has now created a tool to emulate Rutkowski’s style against his wishes using a LoRA model. While some argue this is unethical, others justify it since Rutkowski’s art has already been widely used in Stable Diffusion 1.5. The debate highlights the blurry line between innovation and infringement in the emerging field of AI art.

  • FaceDeer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    At least now you’re admitting that it’s a difference of opinion, that’s progress.

    You think it should be illegal to do this stuff. Fine. I think copyright duration has been extended ridiculously long and should be a flat 30 years at most. But in both cases our opinions differ from what the law actually says. Right now there’s nothing illegal about training an AI off of someone’s lawfully-obtained published work, which is what was done here.

    • Pulse@dormi.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not a fan of our copyright system. IMO, it’s far to long and should also include clauses that place anything not available for (easy) access in the public domain.

      Also, I’m not talking about what laws say, should say or anything like that.

      I’ve just been sharing my opinion that it’s unethical and I’ve not seen any good explanation for how stealing someone else’s labor is “good”.