Stolen Artist Work Used to Train MidJourney?
In the bustling world of art and technology, a storm is brewing that's got thousands of painters, cartoonists, sculptors, and other creatives up in arms. At the heart of the storm? A controversy involving an artificial intelligence art generator by Midjourney, which has sparked heated debates around copyright infringement and consent.
The fuse was lit when a list surfaced online, naming 4,700 creatives whose work is allegedly being used without their permission to fuel Midjourney's text-to-image generative AI tech. The reveal has confirmed many artists' long-held suspicions about their creations being co-opted by AI without a nod in their direction.
Top-Rated Sketch Book
9x12 inches
Top Spiral Bound
100-Sheets (68lb/100gsm)
Acid Free
For Kids, Adults, Beginners & Pros
This list, first shared by artist Jon Lam and part of a court exhibit from a lawsuit targeting Midjourney among others, is just the tip of the iceberg. There's also a “Midjourney Style List” making rounds, proposing a whopping 16,000 new names to join the ranks. Although the original document has gone MIA, the diligent Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine holds its echoes.
Adin Ross Twitter
David Holz, the brain behind Midjourney, reportedly dropped this list on Discord back in 2022, spotlighting a wide array of creatives from the iconic Tim Burton and Pablo Picasso to the legendary Norman Rockwell, Walt Disney, and the enigmatic Banksy. Not to mention, a surprising entry: a 6-year-old artist, capturing the breadth of those implicated, from the famous to the yet-to-be-discovered talents.
This saga has reignited the fiery debate: Should AI have free rein to mimic and monetize the works of real-life artists? The legal and ethical quandaries surrounding copyright infringement and consent are swirling, pushing artists to demand tighter reins on AI art generators.
Midjourney, like other tools in its league, crunches through massive data sets, including artworks and film stills, to generate new images based on user prompts. However, artists argue that these AI creations are less about inspiration and more about replicating their copyrighted works.
David Holz admitted in a Forbes interview that Midjourney hadn't sought permissions from living artists or rights to copyrighted works. This admission underscores the murky waters of copyright and AI's use of online images.
Shameless plug 🤣 My own AI art for sale$$$
In response, some artists and researchers, like those from the University of Chicago, are fighting back with technology designed to trip up AI's data scraping abilities. Meanwhile, the legal battles and calls for clearer regulations continue to unfold.
So, what's your take on this collision of creativity and technology? Should AI art generators like Midjourney be allowed to use artists' work without explicit permission, or is it time for a new chapter in copyright law? Dive into the comments and let's discuss how we navigate these uncharted waters, ensuring respect for artists' rights while exploring the frontier of AI-driven creativity. The floor is yours, warriors!
