Japanese Art and Content Sites Tighten Policies Regarding AI-Generated Art – Interest


Last week, AI-generated drawings of anime characters eating ramen went viral in Japan. The fun thing about the trend was seeing the AI ​​come up with technically impressive art that nevertheless misses out on weird details, like characters eating ramen with their hands. The meme has inspired human artists to draw parodies and comics with good-natured humor, but not all uses of AI art have been so well received.

An example of AI ramen art:

An example of artist parody:

As AI artwork has improved by leaps and bounds over the past few months, the conversation has intensified around the ethics of claiming creative ownership of AI art. , the use of artwork posted online for learning AI without the permission of the artist, and other thorny issues. This month, Japanese art/content websites FANZA, DLsite, Skeb and Niconico have issued statements to users regarding their policies on AI-generated art.

FANZA posted an announcement for registrants doujin circle creators on October 7 stating that it had blocked submission sales between October 7 and 10 that would be AI-generated. All AI-generated submissions must now be labeled as such.

DLsite also announced on October 7 that it is temporarily suspending sales of AI-generated works, as it works out an appropriate system to differentiate human work from AI. This is to avoid unnecessary restrictions in the future, as many areas of AI technology advancement currently occupy a legal gray area.

Skeb posted a Tweeter on October 13, stating that it would introduce methods to make it more difficult to extract tools and robots to extract artwork posted on Skeb for AI learning programs.

Niconico announced on October 19 that AI-generated works will be excluded from the service’s monetization program. Although the service does not restrict the creation or distribution of AI work, users will not be able to earn money from automatically generated work. However, if the AI ​​art is only a small piece of the overall creation and the rest is created by the individual posting it, it will still be applicable for monetization. Users are also allowed to monetize the AI ​​output if they developed the AI ​​themselves.

As Niconico explains in his blog post, the reason for these accolades is that the monetization program was designed to financially support creative work. A work that is produced without any labor defeats the purpose of the program.

What do you think of the gap between AI and human art, and where is the technology heading in the future?

[Via Automaton]


Comments are closed.