In a clash between human creativity and artificial intelligence (AI), visual artists are taking legal action against companies that use their artwork to train AI image generators. Kelly McKernan, an artist known for her vibrant and surreal paintings, is one of three artists leading the charge in a lawsuit against AI tool makers. The case, currently awaiting a decision from a San Francisco federal judge, highlights the growing concern among creators regarding the unauthorized use of their work by AI systems.
Artistic identity at risk
McKernan’s distinctive style, characterized by bold colors and feminine figures, caught the attention of AI-generated images that closely resembled her work. These AI-generated images were created by feeding her name into AI engines. This disturbing trend raised alarms for McKernan and other artists, who saw their creative identities at risk due to the proliferation of AI-generated content that imitates their unique styles.
Artists unite in legal battle
In January, artists Kelly McKernan, Karla Ortiz, and Sarah Andersen filed a lawsuit against Stability AI, the creator of the text-to-image generator Stable Diffusion, along with other AI tool makers like Midjourney and online gallery DeviantArt. The artists allege that these AI image generators infringe upon their copyrights by producing derivative works that directly compete with their original creations.
AI’s rapid advancement and impact
The rise of image generators can be attributed in part to databases like the Large-scale Artificial Intelligence Open Network (LAION), which facilitates the training of AI models using vast amounts of publicly accessible images. While the project’s creator, Christoph Schuhmann, recognizes artists’ concerns, he emphasizes the inevitability of AI-generated content becoming indistinguishable from human-created content. This development poses challenges for creators across various fields, from artists to actors, writers, and musicians, as they attempt to protect their intellectual property from AI exploitation.
The dilemma of copyright infringement
The lawsuit challenges the ethical and legal boundaries of AI’s use of copyrighted content. Stability AI and other defendants argue that they create entirely new and unique images, using input prompts that result in distinct outputs. However, the artists claim that these generated images often resemble their original works too closely, raising questions about the violation of copyright rights.
The human element
Karla Ortiz, a concept artist and illustrator in the entertainment industry, emphasizes the vital role that human artists play in shaping visual content for movies and other media. Ortiz fears that the rise of AI-generated content could lead to a decline in opportunities and compensation for human artists, as AI-created images become more cost-effective for employers.
A battle for artistic integrity
As the legal battle unfolds, artists like McKernan and Ortiz remain committed to preserving the essence of human creativity and artistic expression. They argue that the unique human touch that artists bring to their work cannot be replicated by AI, and that protecting the integrity of their creations is essential to the future of their profession.
Anticipating the future
The outcome of the lawsuit against AI tool makers could set a precedent for how creators’ rights are protected in the face of AI advancements. The artists seek not to hinder AI development, but rather to ensure that their work is not exploited without consent. As the boundaries between AI-generated and human-created content continue to blur, the legal battle between artists and AI companies underscores the larger conversation about the intersection of technology, creativity, and intellectual property rights.
