Reddit user trains AI to imitate an illustrator, without asking her permission: "I don't really care if you think this is right or wrong."

[DiipuSurotu]

Last weekend, Hollie Mengert woke up to an email pointing her to a Reddit thread, the first of several messages from friends and fans, informing the Los Angeles-based illustrator and character designer that she was now an AI model.

The day before, a Redditor named MysteryInc152 posted on the Stable Diffusion subreddit, "2D illustration Styles are scarce on Stable Diffusion, so I created a DreamBooth model inspired by Hollie Mengert's work."

Using 32 of her illustrations, MysteryInc152 fine-tuned Stable Diffusion to recreate Hollie Mengert's style. He then released the checkpoint under an open license for anyone to use. The model uses her name as the identifier for prompts: "illustration of a princess in the forest, holliemengert artstyle," for example.

Click to shrink...

The post sparked a debate in the comments about the ethics of fine-tuning an AI on the work of a specific living artist, even as new fine-tuned models are posted daily. The most-upvoted comment asked, "Whether it's legal or not, how do you think this artist feels now that thousands of people can now copy her style of works almost exactly?"

Click to shrink...

I talked to Hollie Mengert about her experience last week. "My initial reaction was that it felt invasive that my name was on this tool, I didn't know anything about it and wasn't asked about it," she said. "If I had been asked if they could do this, I wouldn't have said yes."

She couldn't have granted permission to use all the images, even if she wanted to. "I noticed a lot of images that were fed to the AI were things that I did for clients like Disney and Penguin Random House. They paid me to make those images for them and they now own those images. I never post those images without their permission, and nobody else should be able to use them without their permission either. So even if he had asked me and said, can I use these? I couldn't have told him yes to those."

Click to shrink...

I reached out to MysteryInc152 on Reddit to see if they'd be willing to talk about their work, and we set up a call. [. . .]

Reading the Reddit thread, his stance on the ethics seemed to border on fatalism: the technology is inevitable, everyone using it is equally culpable, and any moral line is completely arbitrary. In the Reddit thread, he debated with those pointing out a difference between using Stable Diffusion as-is and fine-tuning an AI on a single living artist:

"There is no argument based on morality. That's just an arbitrary line drawn on the sand. I don't really care if you think this is right or wrong. You either use Stable Diffusion and contribute to the destruction of the current industry or you don't. People who think they can use [Stable Diffusion] but are the 'good guys' because of some funny imaginary line they've drawn are deceiving themselves. There is no functional difference."

Click to shrink...

More at:

Invasive Diffusion: How one unwilling illustrator found herself turned into an AI model - Waxy.org

How does it feel to be turned into an AI image model? To find out, I opened a door to the multiverse and interviewed the creator and unwilling subject of a controversial DreamBooth model.

waxy.org

Thoughts?

 

[super-famicom]

That Reddit user is an asshole

 

[WereSalamander]

"There is no argument based on morality. That's just an arbitrary line drawn on the sand. I don't really care if you think this is right or wrong. You either use Stable Diffusion and contribute to the destruction of the current industry or you don't. People who think they can use [Stable Diffusion] but are the 'good guys' because of some funny imaginary line they've drawn are deceiving themselves. There is no functional difference."

Click to shrink...

What an edgelord.

 

[Empty Your Head]

It's incredibly fucked up and will continue to increase the exploitation of those in creative fields.

Why would I pay you to draw this when for significantly less, I can use an A.I. to make an extremely convincing counterfeit?

Just like I feel that there needs to be a federally-imposed limit on the amount of automation can replace labor-based jobs (the best solution would be UBI, I know), there need to be stronger protections over workers within the arts.

 

[mbpm]

Nobody owns anything anymore I guess

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Speaking as someone who HAS made AI art - my profile picture is a piece I made - I feel like building an AI specifically to ape one singular artist's style in particular is a bridge too far. That feels weirdly predatory on a level even I'm not okay with.

 

[Maximum Spider]

I fucking hate all of this.

 

[Hours Left]

There's going to be a legal backlash to these AI programs soon IMO. All it'll take is one artist or company with enough clout and resources to fight back and it's going to get very messy.

 

[Dice]

What can you even say

 

[Grenchel]

While the reddit user is indeed an asshole, if there isn't a legal boundary this is really going to become par the course soon. I just don't see how it doesnt.

 

[VariantX]

There's going to be a legal backlash to these AI programs soon IMO. All it'll take is one artist or company with enough clout and resources to fight back and it's going to get very messy.

Click to shrink...

Until then, its open season on any up and coming artists trying to make a living through their craft. Because for damn sure the music industry did it...to an extreme unfortunately.

 

[Owl]

It's incredibly fucked up and will continue to increase the exploitation of those in creative fields.

Why would I pay you to draw this when for significantly less, I can use an A.I. to make an extremely convincing counterfeit?

Just like I feel that there needs to be a federally-imposed limit on the amount of automation can replace labor-based jobs (the best solution would be UBI, I know), there need to be stronger protections over workers within the arts.

Click to shrink...

Don't think there is a solution in trying to limit automation. Long term, UBI will just need to be implemented

The solution for this case though is that AI trained on art should need permission to use that art for training models. The way it works now is just straight copyright theft

Unfortunately the software is already out there so I dunno how much can be done now

 

[Hollywood Duo]

we need laws and regulations around this asap

 

[mbpm]

NFTs heralded this.

 

[lvl 99 Pixel]

seems to be a trend that anyone doing this responds with total apathy

 

[Chairmanchuck (另一个我)]

Like 2-3 months ago people were like
"It will take years to actually not look like uncanny valley" and it just took months:

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Don't think there is a solution in trying to limit automation

The solution for this case though is that AI trained on real art should need permission to use that art for training models. The way it works now is just straight copyright theft

Unfortunately the software is already out there so I dunno how much can be done now

Click to shrink...

Exactly. If you can at least license an artist to use their work for training the AI, that's at least something. Pay the artist whose style you're cannibalizing. Give them royalties based on the money the AI model is bringing in, at least.

seems to be a trend that anyone doing this responds with total apathy

Click to shrink...

That's tech for you. Nobody actually cares about the long-term implications of the march of tech, they only care about continuing said march.

 

[Morgenstern]

Even if there was a legal precedent preventing AI emulation of artists' works in a given country, someone will just set up shop somewhere else and continue doing it. This sucks and I can't think of a good way artists can counter this

 

[Milk]

I can't imagine how enraging that must be as an artist. Fuck the reddit user and fuck these AI art programs.

 

[ManNR]

Sounds to me like he is trying to make a point about the dangers of the tech.

Also, he sounds like an a-hole.

 

[apathetic]

Welcome to the future I guess. How can you even stop this?

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Welcome to the future I guess. How can you even stop this?

Click to shrink...

I'm not entirely sure it's even possible TO stop it. The problem with all these open-source models is that they basically rely entirely on the honor system. All it takes is one unethical prick to make a model like this and then once it spreads, it's too late to contain it.

 

[Night]

It's a box that can't be shut.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

"People who think they can use [Stable Diffusion] but are the 'good guys' because of some funny imaginary line they've drawn are deceiving themselves. There is no functional difference.""

I mean.... Yeah? Would the reaction have been the same had he not been explicit with the artist he were mimicking? The result is the same but this just "feels" worse.

Like this technology is robbing every house in a neighborhood, and he just robbed this house specifically because he liked the stuff inside. They're all getting robbed.

 

[Sounds]

I have no faith in any of this being resolved in the courts. It's gonna be a hellscape for the creative industry.

 

[Trike]

Full article is worth the read. The redditor seems to learn something then immediately dismiss it. Though the artist does make a good point that although it looks similar the touch of a human being vs AI is noticeably different, though it seems like it barely softened the blow.

 

[Slatsunus]

The fact that he used copyrighted images form major companies is the part that's gonna fuck these things.

The copyright office already took back the copyright they gave to an Ai made comic. If that holds a Ai prompted work can't be copywritten then lol SD dies

Long term what's going to happen is lawsuits making it illegal to use copywritten work in models for profit without permission.

It obviously won't stop the open source models. But when they can't be used commercially a lot of the appeal goes out the window.

 

[apathetic]

I'm not entirely sure it's even possible TO stop it. The problem with all these open-source models is that they basically rely entirely on the honor system. All it takes is one unethical prick to make a model like this and then once it spreads, it's too late to contain it.

Click to shrink...

Kinda exactly. This is just how things will go since the only obstruction is "human decency" and I feel like laughing even typing that. Apathy is an easy solution for me but this kind of thing is going to be major. AI generation is only going to get "better".

 

[mbpm]

Like 2-3 months ago people were like
"It will take years to actually not look like uncanny valley" and it just took months:

Click to shrink...

Yeah I had a feeling it was only a matter of time. A lot of people clowned on it, but machine learning is just about cycles and time.

 

[Lumination]

The difference between being a dick and not being a dick is just an arbitrary line in the sand, says internet edgelord #7473273629

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Kinda exactly. This is just how things will go since the only obstruction is "human decency" and I feel like laughing even typing that. Apathy is an easy solution for me but this kind of thing is going to be major. AI generation is only going to get "better".

Click to shrink...

And the scary thing is that it's already really good if you have the time and patience to put effort into it. Like I've made some shit that's absolutely amazing-looking, but it's also specifically for my own personal use and I'm not interested in selling it. I just need it for visual inspiration for characters in my book while I look for real artists to commission to do more complex shit.

Once they get past certain elements that AI struggles with (hands especially, but also symmetrical eyes, and human figures holding things), it's going to be a terrifying shift for the industry. DeviantArt's daily feed is already like 60% AI art and the shift took a month and a half.

 

[Adamska]

Right or wrong, I'm pretty sure copyright law is in violation here, at least from a perspective of the moral rights of the author.

I don't think his position is correct in any way, but I do have to echo the fact that these are all fictions that humans believe in because they choose to, not because it's people's birthright to not have their artistic creations be used against their will.

 

[asmith906]

The fact that we are already to a point where it's borderline impossible to tell if something is computer generated or man made is frankly kind of terrifying.

 

[Jintor]

Fuck that guy and fuck this entire field

 

[gozu]

I think the ethical thing is to obtain the consent of the human author if they are still alive. I don't have a reasoned argument so maybe I'm wrong but It just feels like the right thing to do.

With that said, AI is still far from being good enough to actually compete with human artists without said human artists touching it up. I think it's like self-driving cars; we think we're close to solving it then 15 years later we realize it's way harder than we estimated.

My guess is AI will end up being a tool that artists use to save themselves some time or to get inspiration and nothing more for the foreseeable future.

99% of the prompt-generated AI drawings i've generated are severely flawed or outright garbage.

 

[Sounds]

The fact that we are already to a point where it's borderline impossible to tell if something is computer generated or man made is frankly kind of terrifying.

Click to shrink...

Yah and this why I think any legal argument won't get too far. How can you prove a person didn't make the art?

 

[LiK]

It's shitty

 

[Midee]

Like 2-3 months ago people were like
"It will take years to actually not look like uncanny valley" and it just took months:

Click to shrink...

it still looks like shit though?

 

[R0b1n]

I don't think this can be stopped, even if it is regulated it will only get easier to make your own "training sets"

 

[Yeona]

"There is no argument based on morality. That's just an arbitrary line drawn on the sand. I don't really care if you think this is right or wrong. You either use Stable Diffusion and contribute to the destruction of the current industry or you don't. People who think they can use [Stable Diffusion] but are the 'good guys' because of some funny imaginary line they've drawn are deceiving themselves. There is no functional difference."

Click to shrink...

 

[Dice]

it still looks like shit though?

Click to shrink...

It took 1000% less time to make that AI art than to draw it.
And it's still "good enough", which is basically good enough for most.

And yeah I can only see this getting overturned at ALL if the wrong toes get stepped on and start a huge court case. Not sure if an artist, but def AI musicians imitating an artist's sound I think will do it. ... But I don't know. This situation is sort of a disaster unless we truly are willing to appreciate the artist being in their art. Which... I'm not optimistic on.

 

[asmith906]

Yah and this why I think any legal argument won't get too far. How can you prove a person didn't make the art?

Click to shrink...

The first time I truly got freaked out by AI advancement is when I saw AI generated human faces. With Deepfakes, AI generated voices and stuff like this I don't think people realize how easily this stuff can be used for nefarious purposes.

These models will probably kill a lot of commission art. Or it'll just be people using AI to massively undercut real artists.

 

[Jintor]

i don't think it's necessarily commission art that will suffer, it's more generic art (advertising, stock stuff etc) that will run into issues I think

 

[LiK]

That Reddit user is an asshole

Click to shrink...

sounds about right. pretty much all these people who do this have absolutely no shame and don't care what happens to the original artists' they steal their styles from.

 

[RowdyReverb]

The only protection I can think of is for artists to sell exclusively physical art. Digital art is way too easy for jerks like this to rip off. It sucks though because we were in a golden age of artistic democracy with anyone able to create and share work with the world.

 

[SteveWinwood]

it still looks like shit though?

Click to shrink...

man i wish i could make art that looks half as good as what you think is shit

 

[Vulcano's Assistant]

It is kind of a miracle that the peak of the NFT craze and the floodgates opening for AI art generation missed each other by like 5 months.

I just have to wonder what the uber litigious companies that like to copyright as much as it is legally possible in the art and design industry such a Pantone feel about this.

 

[Watchtower]

NFTs heralded this.

Click to shrink...

First thing I thought of was the Inuyasha coin highlighted in Dan Olson's vid. "Oh yeah we didn't bother with the copyright but like....we can't undo it now. It's in the blockchain so it's set forever. So, like, just kinda have to suck it up and deal with it man." Just absolute dipshitery.

 

[lvl 99 Pixel]

How can you prove a person didn't make the art?

Click to shrink...

That's easy, artists save their files and process. Its probably going to stay very, very easy to know who is actually a creative.

 

[Midee]

man i wish i could make art that looks half as good as what you think is shit

Click to shrink...

I mean it looks "good" if you have no taste, I guess? Like there are basic visual errors in almost every single one of those images and I'm not even an artist.

Here's one thing I do know about AI art, though, and why I think commissions will be safe for the time being: it doesn't understand the concept of revisions yet. Once it does that, then we're all in trouble.