Digital and fine artist Gary Montalbano posted a statement on AI generated images back on 12.20.22 on his Facebook page. His post arrived on my radar in 8.23 when it was shared by several artist friends. I reached out to Gary and received his permission to include his statement in this post on my blog. Here's Gary's photo from his Facebook post.
Every artist who speaks out on AI image generating is raising awareness with the public. This helps build an army of advocates. Educated fans are the front lines for fighting unauthorized use of copyright protected art shared online. Educated fans call out counterfeits, and notify artists of infringements. By building a brand, and developing an empowered following, artists will always be able to provide something that other market forces can't compete with -- personal connection with an artistic vision. When fans learn to move from "likes and shares" to supporting the art they count on … via purchases at online stores, convention tables, pledging Ko-fi/Kickstarter/Patreon, etc … indie artists can not just survive, but thrive. Goals like 500-1,000 fans who will spend $100 a year or more on purchases are achievable. It takes work on the business side of indie art life. But it all adds up. And it can be done. Fans who are literally and emotionally invested in the artists they follow become the champions for creative rights.
You can find more of Gary's art on his website: https://garymontalbano.com/ and Instagram https://www.instagram.com/garymontalbanoart/?hl=en
"Thoughts on A.I. Generated Images (“art”)
A very recent pic of me at LA Comic-Con. All my art in this photo was created traditionally with paint and pencils. However, my professional work is all digital now. Both creative ways are great and I enjoy each of them for different reasons. And I really appreciate when my art and design work is not used without my consent. Which leads to the point of my post…
Artificial Intelligence, (A.I.) art is off to an extremely unethical start. First, the actual program is an impressive invention, which if fed with public domain imagery alone, I would have no problem with it. However, the funders and engineers of Stability A.I. (the company that started this controversy) chose to be dishonorable.
At present, the generated images (A.I. Art) produced from the A.I. programs are fed from what is called a dataset. The vast datasets are billions of images which mainly include copywritten and/or trademarked art, designs and private photos taken from the internet. The engineers specifically choose living artists based on their popularity and aesthetic appeal. The owners of all those art images did not give permission and were not compensated for the use of their artwork.
The “fair use” clause of non-profit organizations is so they can educate the general public and not put the source (the authors of the actual artwork being used) at a disadvantage. No artists are being compensated despite their artworks being used to build the datasets which generate a product that is being sold and valued in the billions now. That generated “art” product is now in direct competition with the vary artists it took from. It was always about the money and the power, not creativity. This is the opposite of a non-profit.
Let us put aside the non-profit label for a moment. For profit corporations that happen to own the non-profit organizations are who benefit from this. All of this nefarious stuff, a new form of business tailored specifically to profit from A.I. art and to avoid any copyright infringement laws were recently created for this purpose.
Any company or person cannot take the copywritten work of another individual and then profit from it. Copyright literally means, the right to copy, that is only for the owner of the copyright. This is partially what is angering multitudes of artists around the world. For them to see their already copywritten protected artworks being directly copied into the A.I. programs, mimicked and directly exploited for profit is criminal.
To further prove this point, the “borrowed” art in the A.I. generated images still, in many cases, has the original artist creators’ signature and /or watermarks in the A.I. generated image. This is undeniable proof of theft. In brief, the current form of A.I. “art” is theft.
Centuries of human labor along with countless hours of thought pulling from the far reaches of human imagination went into all art and design you see on the internet and everywhere in the world. All of it is from tens of thousands of dead and living artists.
So, why give all past, present, and future art to the current and very questionable form of A.I. that only a very few will control and profit from?
Doing the actual meditative art work is the path of self-discovery, which also resonates universally. The hypocritical action of typing in an A.I. worded description prompt into the A.I. program, getting an image (taken from artists years of labor) and then stating, “Look what I created!” is a lie. And it is an insult to all those artists that came before who spent a life time building their talents and pushing for new forms of expression.
When I put a coin into a vending machine and out pops a candy bar, or a bag of chips, or whatever, I don’t exclaim, “Look at what I created!” This is exactly what A.I. generated images from prompts are: an elaborate vending machine where someone else created the product. The person typing the prompt was just picking from an already existing menu of preexisting artist’s images that have been pureed and spat out in a different configuration.
Artist have always existed throughout human history. However, A.I. image generators can only exist if there is human art first put into it. The program cannot create anything without actual human made images put in first. It has no imagination. It does not create. It regurgitates in a slightly different form giving the illusion of something new.
Laws and regulations to further protect the already existing laws and rights of artists (and the general public) from A.I. need to be implemented now.
Senate
and Congress, United States Capitol Main line:
202-224-3121
—
with Meeyun Kwahk-Montalbano."
These posts on the blog have more info on the impact of AI generated images:
http://stuartngbooks.blogspot.com/2023/08/beware-ai-image-generated-non.html
http://stuartngbooks.blogspot.com/2023/08/deciphering-ai-images-clues-to-look-for.html
http://stuartngbooks.blogspot.com/2023/08/why-society-hates-creative-people-notes.html
http://stuartngbooks.blogspot.com/2023/08/your-guide-to-copyright-trademark-and.html
No comments:
Post a Comment