[seshagiric]

An independent artist who was already struggling now got bamboozled by Midjourney. Instead of listing the Artist somewhere in the midst of a million attributions, every instance Midjourney draws a cartoon in the Artist's style should at least have a (clickable link) attribution to the artist's website.

[dmazzoni]

But today there are thousands of (human) artists who create original works "in the style of" other famous artists, and my understanding is that this is completely legal.

Artists own a copyright to their actual works. Not to a "style". Besides, all artists learned from other artists and borrowed lots of ideas from predecessors.

Why should we hold AI to a higher standard than we hold human artists to?

[itishappy]

> Why should we hold AI to a higher standard than we hold human artists to?

Why hold it to human standards at all? It cannot be argued with, jailed, or shot. The only vaguely human thing it can do is draw kinda good.

[axus]

Because it makes some people feel bad, and we care about their feelings?

[CaptainFever]

True, but don't forget to take into account the harm done to the general public if you restrict the ability to "copy styles". Personally, I think that's a much larger concern.

[speedgoose]

If you ask MidJourney to mix the style of a few artists, what should the attribution be? I find the ChatGPT Dall.e solution better: if you name a style from an artist, ChatGPT will attempt to describe the style rather than using the artist name.