Also when they make AI that doesn't require real artist input to even do what it does now then I'll believe it's anything but the plagiarism that it is.

[–] ShrimpCurler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't find this argument very convincing. All artists draw some inspiration from previous artwork, that doesn't make it plagiarism. Even if it's heavily influenced by other artwork it's not plagiarism if it's something original.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

[–] Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago

My art started as copying sailor moon. Then copying other anime styles. I make totoro and other copyrighted characters into figurines. Creativity shouldn't ever be owned. It's not property. If these Chinese knock off companies can do it why can't I? Oh because I'm not a freaking corporation with lawyers.

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 10 points 11 months ago

Plagiarism is disguising another person's work as your own. Assuming the AI generated image is labeled as such, no plagiarism is occurring.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

When real artists make art without tools made by someone else, or knowledge gained form someone else, I'll agree with you.

We stand on the shoulders of the giants who came before us so we can reach higher than they ever did.