His style has been requested over 400,000 times, even surpassing legends like Picasso and Da Vinci—all without his consent.

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.

    •  KoboldCoterie   ( @KoboldCoterie@pawb.social ) 
      1•11 months ago

      if you recreate someone else’s work that is a violation of copyright.

      Only if the work is copyrighted, and your copy does not constitute fair use…

      I could create a faithful reproduction of the Mona Lisa (or… I mean, someone could, I sure couldn’t), and it’s not violating copyright, because the Mona Lisa is not copyrighted.

      •  Samus Crankpork   ( @Crankpork@beehaw.org ) 
        2•11 months ago

        I could create a faithful reproduction of the Mona Lisa

        You could, but Stable Diffusion couldn’t. All it can do is output what it’s been fed. It doesn’t know composition, or colour theory. It doesn’t understand that something is a human, or a fabric, or how materials work, it just reproduces variations of what it’s been fed. Calling it “intelligence” is disingenuous: it doesn’t “know” anything, it just reproduces what’s built into it’s database, usually without the artist’s permission.