On AI Generated Art

[Ms Littlefish]

There is nothing stopping anyone here from using AI-generated assets. The forum just requests you do not distribute them here. The same goes for ripped assets. We can’t stop you, y’all know where to find them. It just doesn’t need to be distributed here. We will only remove games made with them at the request of the copyright holder. That’s the issue.

There are presently a lot of quandaries about ownership and copyright when it comes to AI-generated art. If there is also a monetary incentive for the publisher, why is that shocking?

Probably no one doubts distribution is restricted to free resources to minimize competition, but many users also found it annoying when a bunch of randoms would sign up and spam paid content that had little practical use for RM.

While there’s a clear business benefit, the forum probably does not want to see a flood of AI-generated assets with unverifiable terms. Regardless of business-side, forum-side still sees an improved quality of content when various policies are implemented.

I’ll just end it at if you saw the tutorial, recruitment, and classifieds threads in our moderation queues, you’d realize it has very little to do with stifling collaborative efforts and asset distribution and more to do with literal garbage getting posted.

 

[123edc]

the forum probably does not want to see a flood of AI-generated assets with unverifiable terms.

"the forum" is a pretty broad term,

if you mean "it's owners" with it ...
then naturally, they're selling dlc's ... more AI = less dlc ... oubviously, they don't want that

if you mean "certain artists" with it ...
then again, naturally ... they're selling art ... more AI = less sold pieces

the same way, that taxi drivers don't like self driving cars on the streets
[they cost them their jobs]

and the exact same reasoning, why in ancient times ppl started to destroy new machines during the industrial revolution - they made their lives more comfortable long term ... but short term only the job loss (with everything tid to it) was visible

...
if you, by "the forum" however mean the average user ...
then i would say, that "don't want to have it mixed with hand-made" would probably describe it better ... many of us don't have problems with AI stuff ... just not advertised and sold as actual handmade (which - once it get's even better - you won't be capable of preventing anyway)

that's why certain - realy big - art websites start to create own sections for AI and just watch, that these things don't get mixed up with each other ...

 

[Ms Littlefish]

AI has a lot of potential and I really do not think anyone is afoul for having interest in developing or using it. For the present time, I just think there are questions that are important to ask so there’s some virtue in holding our horses. That’s all.

I definitely don’t speak for the whole forum, I’m just a user myself. Though, in almost 10 years I definitely have seen a large part of this particular community (though naturally not all, not possible to be all) have interest in the terms and verifying the original source of a piece of work, which is why I think a wait-and-see approach is best. That, and the “I aM ARTeeeesT” scenario would 100% happen.

Because, you’re right! It’s a tool that is already here and it will absolutely grow. There will be users who learn to utilize it in creative and innovative ways, especially as it improves, so these questions a lot of people have are growing more important to answer. There’s no putting it back in the box.

 

[Holder]

There has been a legal determination that states no one can claim ownership of AI generated content. As far as I recall it may only relate to US law.
I've seen a lot of resources which state they're AI generated and also being sold on itch. Which personally I think is a horrible practice.

People crediting the person that generated content could lead to others believing that they created it - not generated it. I feel like that would be a condition if said AI resource section ever came to be.

 

[123edc]

have interest in the terms and verifying the original source of a piece of work,

and i don't disagree with that statement,
which is exactly, why i said, that the important point would just be, to seperate the sections between these types (hand-made / ai-edited / full ai)

to go even a step further, i'd personally say,
the sooner such a delineation happens, the less likely it will be, that these things get mixed together in the future (due to the lack of such a differentiation)

 

[Ms Littlefish]

Damn, y’all. I apologize for stirring up unnecessary drama on this topic again. My bad. Whoosh. As one user said on the first page, the Fuzz has spoken and there’s a debate thread elsewhere. I definitely think it’s an interesting topic worth discussing, but I’ll leave it here.

I would suggest using a similar avenue and let this be what it is, a community announcement.

 

[coyotecraft]

I'm sorry too. I didn't realize this announcement was from January.
But I'll say there isn't a flood of AI generated resource on other sites. Not yet anyways.
I also waded through the 20 million stickies from 2012 to see which would get this "rule" update. They just made an addendum under the Resource Showcase rule about assets that could be made with generators.
Which - verbally - sounds related. But that's not why the rule existed. It was never really enforced anyways because it was too elitist.

 

[nbgamemaker]

Hard agree with this choice.