AI Artwork - Confirmed to be Allowed on Steam

[Psycho]

I contacted Steam Support to get a clear answer on whether or not AI artwork is allowed on Steam. They said that it is indeed allowed.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3031939010
What are your thoughts on this?

[Sen no Rikyū]

Here is why that's a good thing!

[Ogami]

Chompman eredeti hozzászólása:

It's not fine because it's using copyrighted content to make it and it's theft of content to make the creation.

And then other people can profit off of stolen work like that and that's a serious legal issue.

Its actually not, there was a court ruling about it a few weeks ago.
Unless the AI completely copies the artstyle AND created a picture thats nearly identical to the original artist ( which never happens) its not illegal.
A lot of people dont seem to understand how AI works, it does not take the data from a single artist, is has millions and millions of data of pictures that it freely mixes and combines as needed.
Each AI created picture may take up data from a few thousand different pictures to create a new one, even if its trying to emulate a prominent style.
As someone who used Stable Diffusion on their PC for about a year now and let it create about 50k pictures in that time each result is different every time.
Unless you flat out tell the AI to take a existing picture as a starting point and then just alter it you will never run into direct "stealing" from anyone.

Thats like saying someone seeing a picture on the internet and then drawing their own in the same artstyle is "stealing".

For the same reason AI pictures cant be copyrighted, they have no singular creator and are combinations of thousands of data points to create a picture, each with a different source.

Destrunken eredeti hozzászólása:

and also looks like ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. lol.

I disagree, if you know what you are doing, which prompts and scene composition you want, you can get absolutely beautiful results with AI.
My wallpaper folder is by now 90% AI content because you can make exactly what you want.

[Chompman]

Ogami eredeti hozzászólása:

Chompman eredeti hozzászólása:

It's not fine because it's using copyrighted content to make it and it's theft of content to make the creation.

And then other people can profit off of stolen work like that and that's a serious legal issue.

Its actually not, there was a court ruling about it a few weeks ago.
Unless the AI completely copies the artstyle AND created a picture thats nearly identical to the original artist ( which never happens) its not illegal.
A lot of people dont seem to understand how AI works, it does not take the data from a single artist, is has millions and millions of data of pictures that it freely mixes and combines as needed.
Each AI created picture may take up data from a few thousand different pictures to create a new one, even if its trying to emulate a prominent style.
As someone who used Stable Diffusion on their PC for about a year now and let it create about 50k pictures in that time each result is different every time.
Unless you flat out tell the AI to take a existing picture as a starting point and then just alter it you will never run into direct "stealing" from anyone.

Thats like saying someone seeing a picture on the internet and then drawing their own in the same artstyle is "stealing".

For the same reason AI pictures cant be copyrighted, they have no singular creator and are combinations of thousands of data points to create a picture, each with a different source.

Destrunken eredeti hozzászólása:

and also looks like ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. lol.

I disagree, if you know what you are doing, which prompts and scene composition you want, you can get absolutely beautiful results with AI.
My wallpaper folder is by now 90% AI content because you can make exactly what you want.

Do you have a link to that as the only one I know of is the court saying such work cannot be copyrighted?

It's still considered theft by many and there are still suits over it because of that reason.

[Ogami]

Yeah that was the one you mentioned. The only ruling so far.
https://www.klgates.com/Federal-Court-Rules-Work-Generated-by-Artificial-Intelligence-Alone-Is-Not-Eligible-for-Copyright-Protection-8-30-2023

Artists cant claim ownership on AI content even if the AI content was trained with data of their output because the results are based on thousands of different data points and not just that artists even if it emulates the drawing style.
And yes, you are right that there are still multiple lawsuits going on at the moment but the only ruling so far was in favor of AI.
That may change in the future but for the moment AI created artwork can not infringe on copyright of the original artist even if it copies their style.

[Toastpiratewilly]

Psycho eredeti hozzászólása:

SlowMango eredeti hozzászólása:

It's always been allowed as long as the developer using it can prove it was only trained on material they owned the copyright to.

Just wondering, is that for developers making games on Steam that are using AI assets, or people uploading AI artwork?

Moderating AI art through random user uploads is too much of a task for them to bother putting time and resources into. People constantly reupload and steal regular human art on games' artwork pages all the time, too.

[Low Standards]

Yeah, so I can make a crappy game with AI now on Steam. I will make it Early Access. Actually do I need a game to get on Early Access or will just a promise do?

[Low Standards]

Toastpiratewilly eredeti hozzászólása:

Psycho eredeti hozzászólása:

Just wondering, is that for developers making games on Steam that are using AI assets, or people uploading AI artwork?

Moderating AI art through random user uploads is too much of a task for them to bother putting time and resources into. People constantly reupload and steal regular human art on games' artwork pages all the time, too.

They don't seem to put time or resources into anything though when it comes to consumers?

[Chompman]

Low Standards eredeti hozzászólása:

Yeah, so I can make a crappy game with AI now on Steam. I will make it Early Access. Actually do I need a game to get on Early Access or will just a promise do?

Only if you can prove it's all your content and the AI items were trained on your work only.

[superneko]

Chompman eredeti hozzászólása:

superneko eredeti hozzászólása:

I'm confused. If AI generated content cannot be copyrighted, then what's the issue in using them freely by others? I get that it was generated by a model that used copyrighted works but the generated work itself is not copyrighted, so it should be fine?

It's not fine because it's using copyrighted content to make it and it's theft of content to make the creation.

And then other people can profit off of stolen work like that and that's a serious legal issue.

But the generated content has no copyright though so you can't act on it anyway?

[be]

okay

[Chompman]

superneko eredeti hozzászólása:

Chompman eredeti hozzászólása:

It's not fine because it's using copyrighted content to make it and it's theft of content to make the creation.

And then other people can profit off of stolen work like that and that's a serious legal issue.

But the generated content has no copyright though so you can't act on it anyway?

It having no copyright simply means it's free for others to use without permission but the problem is the content is made using copyright material that people do not want to be used without permission as it's theft since a lot of artists charge for their creations.

If you have the creation only using content you own then that's fine and allowed on steam however that will mean other people could in theory use any such content the AI makes without paying you and that's not something any company wants.

[Satoru]

Ogami eredeti hozzászólása:

Yeah that was the one you mentioned. The only ruling so far.
https://www.klgates.com/Federal-Court-Rules-Work-Generated-by-Artificial-Intelligence-Alone-Is-Not-Eligible-for-Copyright-Protection-8-30-2023

Artists cant claim ownership on AI content even if the AI content was trained with data of their output because the results are based on thousands of different data points and not just that artists even if it emulates the drawing style.
And yes, you are right that there are still multiple lawsuits going on at the moment but the only ruling so far was in favor of AI.
That may change in the future but for the moment AI created artwork can not infringe on copyright of the original artist even if it copies their style.

That's only really says that a company selling AI art cannot copyright the art being generated.

However the use of copyright images to train an AI is copyright infringmenet unless the original artists agrees to that use. The fact that tech companies conveniently stole copyrighted images and just shrug their shoulders doesn't negate that fact

[Ecofalia]

I think AI art should be allowed, but I think people should always be required to be transparent about how they made their art. It shouldn't be allowed to claim that your AI art was drawn by you. Preferably it should be made clear that it's AI art. It is however, and will be even more so in the future, difficult to enforce this.

[Ogami]

Avopasia eredeti hozzászólása:

I think AI art should be allowed, but I think people should always be required to be transparent about how they made their art. It shouldn't be allowed to claim that your AI art was drawn by you. Preferably it should be made clear that it's AI art. It is however, and will be even more so in the future, difficult to enforce this.

That 100%. AI generated art should always be labeled as such.
Creating AI pictures is not being an artist.
While there is some skill involved in using the right prompt combinations and image composition and such a lot is really just memorizing and of trial and error.
I have uploaded a few AI pictures in my artwork section on Steam but i labeled all of them as created by AI.
Everything would just be deceiving.

[-The-Wizard]

SlowMango eredeti hozzászólása:

It's always been allowed as long as the developer using it can prove it was only trained on material they owned the copyright to.

which means its not allowed. cause NONE of the publicly available ai art generators own the material they were trained on, this is just a loophole steam is using to ban ai art without banning ai art..