Greg Rutkowski, a digital artist known for his surreal style, opposes AI art but his name and style have been frequently used by AI art generators without his consent. In response, Stable Diffusion removed his work from their dataset in version 2.0. However, the community has now created a tool to emulate Rutkowski’s style against his wishes using a LoRA model. While some argue this is unethical, others justify it since Rutkowski’s art has already been widely used in Stable Diffusion 1.5. The debate highlights the blurry line between innovation and infringement in the emerging field of AI art.

  • Pulse@dormi.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    By that logic I can sell anything I download from the web while also claiming credit for it, right?

    Downloading to view != downloading to fuel my business.

    • FaceDeer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, and that’s such a ridiculous leap of logic that I can’t come up with anything else to say except no. Just no. What gave you that idea?

      • Pulse@dormi.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because this thread was about the companies taking art feeding it into their machine a D claiming not to have stolen it.

        Then you compared that to clicking a link.

        • FaceDeer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, because it’s comparable to clicking a link.

          You said:

          By that logic I can sell anything I download from the web while also claiming credit for it, right?

          And that’s the logic I can’t follow. Who’s downloading and selling Rutkowski’s work? Who’s claiming credit for it? None of that is being done in the first place, let alone being claimed to be “ok.”