If you’ve been on social media in the last few days, you’ve probably come across the Studio Ghibli trend. Using ChatGPT, many people have transformed their own pictures into images that emulate the style of the famous Japanese animation studio. For one side, it has led to a polemic discussion regarding AI ethics and copyright, but, on the other hand, it has fulfilled people’s desires to see themselves inside movies they admire. In this case, being a creative outlet for the main public.
Therefore, on this April 15th that celebrates World Art Day, Her Campus Cásper Líbero questioned two artists to understand how artificial intelligence can ethically contribute to a future for the arts.
IS THE STUDIO GHIBLI TREND CONSIDERED ART?
Nowadays, TikTok surpasses more than 680K videos posted using the StudioGhibli hashtag and the majority of them are artificially created. But, for Katia Wille, these creations cannot be considered art.
She was one of the visual artists who pioneered the use of AI in Brazil. Back in 2019, Willie opened “ToTa Machina”, an exposition set in Rio de Janeiro in which the artworks transformed through movement and lights according to the visitors’ reactions. This recognition was due to Microsoft’s artificial intelligence, Azure, that could identify eight different human emotions.
Now, she recognizes that Open IA, the developer of ChatGPT, has found a legal breach. “They trained it based on the style, and style can be copied and is not protected by copyrights.” Intellectual property is a crucial point on the polemic discussion regarding the use of AI, since it has sparked reproval from artists. Models such as ChatGPT have been trained using media without its creators permission, but this is not prohibited by any specific international law.
CAN ART MADE WITH AI RECEIVE COPYRIGHTS?
This legal uncertainty is defined by Sergio Venancio as a gray area, that difficults the application of AI in the arts. Programmer and artist, he’s a doctor on Visual Arts and Artificial Intelligence by the University of São Paulo. During his research, he developed a software called “Extentio”, capable of creating drawings based on observation through digital media. Worried about biases and copyright issues, he curated the images based on a creative theme.
Recently, an image generated with AI received for the first time protection on copyrights. Kent Keirsey, the CEO of Invoke, a company that develops a creative engine with artificial intelligence, was able to demonstrate to the U.S Copyright Office that his artwork named “A Single Slice of American Cheese” had equal machine and human intervention.
Reflecting on this, Venancio agrees that, through extensive documentation, “it is possible to attribute authorship, but it is necessary to be careful with rightful credits” to other artists and creations. He also adds that “these images are easy to produce and have this certain perfect aesthetic that can be defined as smooth looking”, which makes them difficult to be consider art.
HOW CAN AI BECOME A TOOL FOR ETHICALLY CREATING ART?
Sergio Venancio believes that in order for art to be created with AI it is indispensable to promote technological and artistic literacy amongst the general public. “A way to solve this is through education, with art history and creating repertoire that allows people to differentiate between concept and technical capabilities.” And this encompasses as well an ethical conscience by programmers and users of the AI tools.
Katia Wille defends that for a work to be considered art it requires a sort of presence, born from the interaction between humans. “There’s creative power in AI, but art is so much more than this. For us to connect with it, beyond concept and techniques, it has to instigate something: a belief in what you don’t see.” She defines this idea of combining technological and human abilities as a “hybridization of AI”.
As a consequence, she highlights a need for more knowledge regarding the use in arts. “First thing [to do] is to fight the ignorance in this topic, because where there’s ignorance, there’s fear and where there’s fear, there’s prejudice. Not by artists, but by institutions of art. The artistic class still sees artificial intelligence as a threat.”
Finally, Wille also argues that it is essential for this matter to have a broader regulation, since big techs are the parts who benefit the most. “Artificial intelligence does not benefit people as it should. It is our responsibility to regulate this, through governmental and non governmental organizations with public participation.”
————————————
The article above was edited by Juliana Sanches.
Like this type of content? Check out Her Campus Cásper Líbero homepage for more.