Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by astrange 1282 days ago
It's always been possible to imitate an artstyle. Nevertheless, they've never gotten IP protection - they're more like trade secrets.

What's notable is "AI users are trying to copy an artist" != "AI has learned from an artist" != "AI has seen the artist's images in the first place". The most popular supposedly stolen-from artist Greg Rutkowski is not in StableDiffusion's training images, even though users are actively trying to copy him, it's a coincidence that it appears to work. Is that unethical?

Also, AI laws (text and data mining exemptions) /have/ been put in place - to make this explicitly legal!
1 comments
oth001 1282 days ago
Imitate, not duplicate. Hours of work/talent vs. stealing an artist's work (see: unlicensed) and feeding it into a software program to spit out a slightly different version (complete with watermarks and all)...
link
astrange 1282 days ago
You don't have much faith in an artist if you think you can "duplicate their style" by looking at 4-5 512x512 images of their work.

> complete with watermarks and all

That's not the AI "copying their watermarks", it's the AI learning "sometimes images have watermarks" and giving them some of its own.

link