634
Rule
(ani.social)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2025
634 points (100.0% liked)
196
17491 readers
1251 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Did he paid studio ghibli for making a draw of their characters? Did he asked the authors of the character for permission for using its image?
Is not that how it's supposed to work for anti-AI folks? Or is it "rules for thee but not for me"?
What the fuck are you talking about?
He’s badly arguing that since the artist saw, has knowledge of, and has recreated the art style using his brain, he’s no better then someone who uses AI to do the ‘same thing’
He can’t tell why it’s different and that’s to be expected of an ai prompter. It would take effort.
It's the same rule, "fair use". Copyright isn't absolute, it needs to strike a balance between "give creators control of their thing" but also "people deserve to participate in our collective culture."
Making a one-off drawing of a character and not trying to make money off of it likely checks the fair use boxes (it's an explicitly fuzzy system, so a trial would be needed to say for sure if it's fair use or not). Whether the training set for a generative AI system is fair use or not is still an open question, but many feel that it can't be, as it's operating on a massive scale (basically every image ever created by humanity) and has the potential to eliminate the entire industry of humans selling the art they create, which copyright is supposed to protect. Ghibli isn't going to be harmed by someone drawing a picture of their characters for a meme. It could be harmed by another company making money off of mass production of knockoffs of their style which were created with thousands of unauthorized copies of their direct artwork.
I have no respect of a AI user who use AI and call them Artist.
Hey, guess what! Your argument is so inane, even OpenAI is now convinced it was a really stupid idea too. But sure, go on pretending that freely available fan art by a single person is exactly the same as a paid service by a multi-billion dollar company.
The thing is that I as a single person, can algo use AI self hosted in my computer. And I can, and being me I will, offer anything I made for free.
If you tell me that the bad thing about AI is pretending to charge money for their usage we would have an agreement. I think is a technology that should be funded by the community or the state and distributed for free usage of everyone.