Current Events > japan looking to make AI images of ghibili films illegal

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://petapixel.com/2025/04/21/japan-considers-making-ai-generated-stuio-ghibli-images-illegal/

hope they just make ALL AI images illegal but nice regardless

There is nothing nice about legislation favouring a specific corporation.

By copyright law it would probably count as derivative. Which does count as copyright infringement in the US.

Syfe posted...

By copyright law it would probably count as derivative. Which does count as copyright infringement in the US.

Yeah, but that would imply that the law applied to AI companies and that would mean that their just flat out theft would have to go to courts.

AI that has been "trained" on any form of copyighted material needs to be treated as a form of (potential) copyright infringement.

Copyright is indeed the enemy of art preservation.

But AI is the enemy of art.

RasterGraphic posted...

AI that has been "trained" on any form of copyighted material needs to be treated as a form of (potential) copyright infringement.

Copyright is indeed the enemy of art preservation.

But AI is the enemy of art.

As the man himself said, it is an insult to life.

I'd only agree with this if it only goes after people that do it for profit.
Just fucking around with it shouldn't lead to jail time.

So many people on Twitter were arguing 'um actually, what Miyazaki meant was...'

I get that people are fed up with AI slop, but it's not copyright violation to draw something in a similar style. Like, if I draw myself or someone else as a Simpsons character I am not violating the Simpsons' copyright.

Good, I'm so fucking sick of this mass-produced A.I. shit aping off far better stuff

DipDipDiver posted...

I get that people are fed up with AI slop, but it's not copyright violation to draw something in a similar style. Like, if I draw myself or someone else as a Simpsons character I am not violating the Simpsons' copyright.

There's a pretty big difference between fan art and a computer algorithm cranking out megatons of soulless garbage

it's the difference between painting the 'Mona Lisa' and having a photocopier spew out a thousand copies of the 'Mona Lisa'

DipDipDiver posted...

I get that people are fed up with AI slop, but it's not copyright violation to draw something in a similar style. Like, if I draw myself or someone else as a Simpsons character I am not violating the Simpsons' copyright.

In this case, no. In the case of AI generators it is 100 percent trained on copyrighted materially, probably illegally

Good >_>

They need to ban all AI art, Pixiv is nothing but AI trash anymore

AceMos posted...

https://petapixel.com/2025/04/21/japan-considers-making-ai-generated-stuio-ghibli-images-illegal/

hope they just make ALL AI images illegal but nice regardless

That's not what they're considering at all and the article is sensationalist clickbait nonsense.

Some people are questioning if it's a violation of copyright and saying it's for courts to decide.

HylianFox posted...

There's a pretty big difference between fan art and a computer algorithm cranking out megatons of soulless garbage

it's the difference between painting the 'Mona Lisa' and having a photocopier spew out a thousand copies of the 'Mona Lisa'

Mona Lisa is public domain so spewing out a thousand copies is totally fine but I get what you're saying.

Metal_Gear_Raxis posted...

They need to ban all AI art, Pixiv is nothing but AI trash anymore

I thought Pixiv took a stand in banning AI from its platform.

Good

I was under the impression a copyright violation can only occur if you profit off it.

Solar_Crimson posted...

I thought Pixiv took a stand in banning AI from its platform.

They didnt. What they did is that anyone who uploads an AI generated picture must label it or itll be deleted and users have the option to not have any of those pictures appear in search results.

Cynrascal posted...

They didnt. What they did is that anyone who uploads an AI generated picture must label it or itll be deleted and users have the option to not have any of those pictures appear in search results.

I do not use pixiv, but deviantart has a similar policy and it isn't enforced basically at all, so you still see floods of AI slop with every site-supported option to stop seeing AI slop on

Is pixiv better about actually making AI slop count as AI slop at least

DipDipDiver posted...

I get that people are fed up with AI slop, but it's not copyright violation to draw something in a similar style. Like, if I draw myself or someone else as a Simpsons character I am not violating the Simpsons' copyright.

That's not really what's happening. "A.I. art" (both terms used in the loosest sense possible) is literally the product of a digital plagiarism regurgitator. It's wholesale mushing existing images, writing, IP, etc. into themed slop.

Cynrascal posted...

They didnt. What they did is that anyone who uploads an AI generated picture must label it or itll be deleted and users have the option to not have any of those pictures appear in search results.

Ah. At least it's enforced, unlike with DeviantArt as was mentioned.

OneSpookyGirl posted...

That's not really what's happening. "A.I. art" (both terms used in the loosest sense possible) is literally the product of a digital plagiarism regurgitator. It's wholesale mushing existing images, writing, IP, etc. into themed slop.

Yeah imagine this:

I copy a single image from some place, let's say, Pokemon: Copyright violation.

Then I alter it by photoshopping in Mickey Mouse: Still copyright violation except now I'm violating two copyrights at once.

I repeat this infinity times, a literal Riemann summation, full indefinite integrations worth of copyright violations and the final product that comes out looking like an original image.

Is that still copyright violation?

Honestly I don't know the answer to that question, but I do feel like if you were only able to create that art because of my art, then I should be compensated in some way for enabling your technology.

Solar_Crimson posted...

Ah. At least it's enforced, unlike with DeviantArt as was mentioned.

Tbh I have the AI art tag banned on pixiv and still see untagged AI art everywhere lmao
If the untagged pictures are actually getting deleted, there must be a whole lot of them

Deej posted...

Tbh I have the AI art tag banned on pixiv and still see untagged AI art everywhere lmao
If the untagged pictures are actually getting deleted, there must be a whole lot of them

It sometimes takes a while.

OneSpookyGirl posted...

That's not really what's happening. "A.I. art" (both terms used in the loosest sense possible) is literally the product of a digital plagiarism regurgitator. It's wholesale mushing existing images, writing, IP, etc. into themed slop.

It's not. I say this not to defend it, I hate techbros, self-proclaimed AI artists, and seeing this crap in search results, but because a misunderstanding of what the training and generation process actually is will lead to court cases being thrown out or worse copyright laws for everyone. The focus needs to be on how and why image analysis for the purpose of training an algorithm specifically and without permission needs to be illegal. Arguing that it's merging images is objectively wrong (a model weighing a few GBs does not contain millions of raw images of thousands of subjects).

Tyranthraxus posted...

Honestly I don't know the answer to that question, but I do feel like if you were only able to create that art because of my art, then I should be compensated in some way for enabling your technology.

It seems like only yesterday the argument was "fair use means I can profit off of or otherwise publish my depictions of copyrighted characters, including art created with ripped game assets." I'm not equating fan art and AI gen, especially as it relates to the profit models, but if people aren't careful they're going to make their own lives worse.

Nothing will come from this. You can't copyright a style. That would be horrible if you could. And a lot of people are misinformed about how the generative process works.

LuigiChalmersJr posted...

Nothing will come from this. You can't copyright a style. That would horrible if you could. And a lot of people are misinformed about how the generative process works.

You can totally copyright a style as Robin Thicke learned the hard way.

https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/music/robin-thicke-pharrell-williams-pay-5-million-marvin-gaye-estate-n947666

Deej posted...

Tbh I have the AI art tag banned on pixiv and still see untagged AI art everywhere lmao
If the untagged pictures are actually getting deleted, there must be a whole lot of them

There ARE a whole lot of them. All the people who couldn't make their own art before can now do it in exactly the lazy way they always hoped they could, press a button and get "art".
The shit is everywhere. There are literal oceans of it. There is probably more AI art on the internet right now than real art.

DodogamaRayBrst posted...

There is nothing nice about legislation favouring a specific corporation.

Nah, fam. This would be a landmark decision that would allow other aggrieved parties to demand their infringed works be removed or the AI bros would face legal ramifications. Nice try though.

LinkDaLunatic posted...

There ARE a whole lot of them. All the people who couldn't make their own art before can now do it in exactly the lazy way they always hoped they could, press a button and get "art".
The shit is everywhere. There are literal oceans of it. There is probably more AI art on the internet right now than real art.

Are people really sharing them on art sites like it's something they did? That's a big eww from me.

Tyranthraxus posted...

You can totally copyright a style as Robin Thicke learned the hard way.

https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/music/robin-thicke-pharrell-williams-pay-5-million-marvin-gaye-estate-n947666

Oh yeah, I remember that case. I can't believe the Gaye estate won that.

LuigiChalmersJr posted...

Oh yeah, I remember that case. I can't believe the Gaye estate won that.

I've been really tryin', baby.

Tryin' to get precedental

For soooo long

LuigiChalmersJr posted...

Oh yeah, I remember that case. I can't believe the Gaye estate won that.

Honestly I'm kind of upset about it as well but law is the law. Unless you're Republican.

Accolon posted...

Are people really sharing them on art sites like it's something they did? That's a big eww from me.

Ready to have your mind melted?
Some people are PAYING for it.
Yes, real money.
Yes, for AI "art".
Yes.

Google "AI art commissions" and suffer an immediate 10 point penalty to your faith in humanity.

McmadnessV3 posted...

I was under the impression a copyright violation can only occur if you profit off it.

The image must contain *something* identifiable as having been created by a human being.
A bedrock legal principal has been that anything of non-human origin, cannot be copyrighted.

LinkDaLunatic posted...

Ready to have your mind melted?
Some people are PAYING for it.
Yes, real money.
Yes, for AI "art".
Yes.

Google "AI art commissions" and suffer an immediate 10 point penalty to your faith in humanity.

WTF, why wouldn't you just gen it yourself if you wanted it that much?

Accolon posted...

WTF, why wouldn't you just gen it yourself if you wanted it that much?

A fool.

His money.

The Departed.

Accolon posted...

WTF, why wouldn't you just gen it yourself if you wanted it that much?

It can get complicated if you want anything beyond the basic "anime girl smiling." Some people aren't tech-savvy or have the desire to learn.

I hate that I don't hate AI pictures as much as I used to.

Accolon posted...

WTF, why wouldn't you just gen it yourself if you wanted it that much?

Well online solutions require you to pay anyway once you run out of free credits and if you don't know what you're doing you probably aren't going to get it right.

Paying a guy who is running a trained model on his own PC is not really any worse than doing it yourself conceptually.

Unless you're paying like $100 or something in which case just hire a real fucking artist.

LuigiChalmersJr posted...

Nothing will come from this. You can't copyright a style. That would be horrible if you could. And a lot of people are misinformed about how the generative process works.

As AI progresses we will inevitably see it fracture in ways that make it infinitely more profitable for corporations and far less accessible or useable for the poor or general average citizen. Being able to copyright styles is one step in that direction.

The goal is profit, they don't actually give a fuck about art

As someone that pretty much hates AI in it's current iteration, there's a huge chance something like this coming to pass is universally bad

R_Jackal posted...

As AI progresses we will inevitably see it fracture in ways that make it infinitely more profitable for corporations and far less accessible or useable for the poor or general average citizen. Being able to copyright styles is one step in that direction.

The goal is profit, they don't actually give a fuck about art

As someone that pretty much hates AI in it's current iteration, there's a huge chance something like this coming to pass is universally bad

this technology will NEVER be capable of creating anything resembling real art

AceMos posted...

this technology will NEVER be capable of creating anything resembling real art

I agree, but being able to protect entire art styles under legal threat would be amazing for sticking it to AI, but it's also REALLY easy to stick it to artists as well.

There are people using it to make facebook pics

and there are people using it in advertising.

ive seen multiple ads using the dumb filter and it feels gross

AceMos posted...

this technology will NEVER be capable of creating anything resembling real art

Corporations don't care. So long as it looks good enough for the general public to throw their money at, they'll keep pursuing this "golden goose".

Solar_Crimson posted...

Corporations don't care. So long as it looks good enough for the general public to throw their money at, they'll keep pursuing this "golden goose".

oh im fully aware

they will gladly burn down the entire planet for this one