[ossner]

Others have pointed out the problems of trolls generating racist or otherwise controversial content using Disney characters and this being short-sighted by Disney, but I think this could just be another case of "no such thing as bad PR".

People will undoubtedly generate reprehensible things using these characters, and I think that's exactly what Disney wants because it's an easy way to make their characters go viral.

[jeffwask]

It's strange though because if you know anything about Disney and how the manage the characters in media and at the parks, they are extremely protective of the brand and image of the characters. Imagineers have very strict rules around virtual character meet and greets and etc.

Allowing their characters to be used in AI generated content blows that all out of the water unless there are some extremely tight guard rails.

They are a half step from flooding the market with Disney Princess porn.

[ossner]

Yes, that is certainly true, but I think there is a certain monetary value attached to that virality that Disney now wants to cash in on, which is something they haven't done before.

There's also the outward plausible deniability of "well we couldn't have known that people would break the guard rails". I can't imagine any other explanation. This decision must have gone through a lot of channels and they must be aware what these characters will be used for.

[squigz]

> They are a half step from flooding the market with Disney Princess porn.

I would think that whatever demand there is for that is already filled.

[buellerbueller]

rule 34 would strongly suggest that is not the case.

[squigz]

Rule 34 suggests there is demand, yes. The various rule 34 commision artists suggests there is supply.

I was mostly making a joke, as the idea of this deal causing a load of Disney princess porn to pop up and causing a sudden surge in people into that is hilarious to me.

[NewsaHackO]

I guess there is an expectation of a lack of control when it’s made through AI, versus an image that is from their owned parks. Even without AI, people have been putting Disney characters in unsavory contextes, and I don’t think anyone ever thought, “Wow, I can’t believe Disney sanctioned that picture of a princess doing whatever.”

[jeffwask]

Yes, but Disney legal is incredibly aggressive with any unauthorized use of characters. They have made day care's repaint walls with character murals. They have an army that chases that stuff down.

[ryandrake]

Which is why it's so weird that they are seemingly doing a 180 if it involves "AI".

The biggest actual impact of the AI craze has been the extent to which mere mention of it is causing businesses to upend themselves and break with decades of historical behavior.

[optimalsolver]

*contexts

[seydor]

Their characters are way past virality

[fudged71]

They’re way past being relevant and that is the problem they are solving… getting mindshare again.