Question about copyright in a game that uses AI

[egopassion]

If my game contains AI-generated images, and those images follow the style of a popular author, will that be considered copyright infringement?

 

[Winterfire]

There's no copyright on AI imagery

 

[egopassion]

There's no copyright on AI imagery

Even if it is incredibly noticeable. For example, I can use AI to repeat the style of a very popular author and thereby make myself additional advertising and this will not be considered a violation of copyright?

 

[Winterfire]

Styles cannot be copyrighted.

 

[egopassion]

Styles cannot be copyrighted.

wow, then it turns out that AI rules.
P.S. Thanks for your help

 

[Winterfire]

Just to be clear, characters (for instance Sakura from Naruto) are copyrighted. However, if you copy Naruto style to create a new different character, then it's fine because styles cannot be copyrighted.

 

[peterppp]

Styles cannot be copyrighted.

good luck making a game using ai based on disney and nintendo characters

 

[Winterfire]

good luck making a game using ai based on disney and nintendo characters

Characters =/= styles, as I've even mentioned in the post above to avoid any confusion

 

[Count Morado]

Even if it is incredibly noticeable. For example, I can use AI to repeat the style of a very popular author and thereby make myself additional advertising and this will not be considered a violation of copyright?

You are saying "images" and then "author." I think you mean "artist."

The jury is still out on copyright infringement cases when dealing with AI generative works - literally. There are active cases about AI and copyright infringement in nearly every jurisdiction around the world.

And I agree with Winterfire's responses, however --- egopassion is being very coy about what they mean and I question what they are doing.

From what I am gathering - it appears you are specifically generating art using very specific prompts stating which address a specific artist's work or you are using the artist's work for the AI software to generate from. As such, I wonder if the art you are having outputted is "in the style of" or AI generative works that include characters/etc in the original artist's works.

For example - using the style of DarkCookie to create your own works, characters, etc using AI and then trying to sell it as part of a product should not be a worry. However, if you are using AI to generate new images of Anon, Debbie, Jenny, etc from "Summertime Saga" to use in your work (or they could be possibly interpreted that way) then doing so would increase your risk of liability.

If the latter is the case, and it is not simply "in the style of" -- and you are not doing it simply for your own use, but to possibly profit - that places your question deeper into the gray area of copyright infringement. The likelihood you would be discovered is small - but if discovered, you might find yourself receiving a Cease and Desist at the minimum from the copyright holder.

In the end - currently, AI generative works aren't being held to a copyright standard seen in human creations. Neither from the aspect of infringement nor on the ability to copyright AI works (AI works are not able to have a copyright).

This may change in the future, but it will always depend upon the circumstances. Always.

If you honestly have questions about the legality of your actions, asking anonymous people on a pirate porn forum is not the best way to get your answer. If you honestly have legal questions - you should seek a legal professional in your area.

 

[egopassion]

Just to be clear, characters (for instance Sakura from Naruto) are copyrighted. However, if you copy Naruto style to create a new different character, then it's fine because styles cannot be copyrighted.

yes i understand that the characters are copyrighted, i just wasn't sure if the styles were copyrighted or not

 

[egopassion]

You are saying "images" and then "author." I think you mean "artist."

The jury is still out on copyright infringement cases when dealing with AI generative works - literally. There are active cases about AI and copyright infringement in nearly every jurisdiction around the world.

And I agree with Winterfire's responses, however --- egopassion is being very coy about what they mean and I question what they are doing.

From what I am gathering - it appears you are specifically generating art using very specific prompts stating which address a specific artist's work or you are using the artist's work for the AI software to generate from. As such, I wonder if the art you are having outputted is "in the style of" or AI generative works that include characters/etc in the original artist's works.

For example - using the style of DarkCookie to create your own works, characters, etc using AI and then trying to sell it as part of a product should not be a worry. However, if you are using AI to generate new images of Anon, Debbie, Jenny, etc from "Summertime Saga" to use in your work (or they could be possibly interpreted that way) then doing so would increase your risk of liability.

If the latter is the case, and it is not simply "in the style of" -- and you are not doing it simply for your own use, but to possibly profit - that places your question deeper into the gray area of copyright infringement. The likelihood you would be discovered is small - but if discovered, you might find yourself receiving a Cease and Desist at the minimum from the copyright holder.

In the end - currently, AI generative works aren't being held to a copyright standard seen in human creations. Neither from the aspect of infringement nor on the ability to copyright AI works (AI works are not able to have a copyright).

This may change in the future, but it will always depend upon the circumstances. Always.

If you honestly have questions about the legality of your actions, asking anonymous people on a pirate porn forum is not the best way to get your answer. If you honestly have legal questions - you should seek a legal professional in your area.

wow wow wow i just wanted to know if i create my character via a model in stable diffusion that uses a certain author's style and then add that character to my game will it violate copyright or not

 

[egopassion]

good luck making a game using ai based on disney and nintendo characters

nope, i'll use the styles of real gurus. Like laliberte, ratatatat74, fellatrix and soraoraora

 

[peterppp]

Characters =/= styles, as I've even mentioned in the post above to avoid any confusion

yeah but you hadnt when i loaded the page and the line between what is style and what is character can be blurry

 

[Count Morado]

wow wow wow i just wanted to know if i create my character via a model in stable diffusion that uses a certain author's style and then add that character to my game will it violate copyright or not

That is why I asked and said what I did. You were being coy and not clear. Had you stated that up front, my essay would have been not necessary.

Creating original characters "in the style of" has not been a worry in the past.

 

[egopassion]

Вот почему я спросил и сказал то, что я сделал. Вы были скромны и неясны. Если бы вы заявили это сразу, мое эссе было бы не нужно.

Создание оригинальных персонажей «в стиле» раньше не было проблемой.
[/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
Да, извините, просто на моем родном языке текст выглядел более осмысленно, видимо, при переводе он потерял свой первоначальный смысл и стал менее понятным. Но все равно спасибо, знать такие вещи все равно не помешает

 

[MissFortune]

Characters =/= styles, as I've even mentioned in the post above to avoid any confusion

Conversely, there's no reason a company (e.g. Disney/Nintendo/etc.) can't sue/C&D you, either. In any average case, a threat ends it. But a company can still take you to court and drain your bank account in the process if they choose to do so. Even if they don't win.

It also depends how closely the end result resembles the IP/artist/etc. it's trying to be similar to. There's plenty of fair use cases that've been lost with this exact argument. Hell, there's even precedent for tracing. If there's enough DNA from the reference work in the new piece of work, then there's 100% grounds for a case. Would it ever get that far? Probably not. But it can.

Then there's the whole Suno/Udio lawsuit. Sony, UMG, etc. are suing the aforementioned for basically this exact thing. We're not at a point with AI where we can say if things are suable or not suable with any level of certainty. The laws simply haven't caught up enough for it. Only thing we can say for sure right now is that one can't claim copyright infringement on an AI generated work as it wasn't made by a human (and maybe because AI art is copyright infringement in and of itself?).

 

[Winterfire]

Conversely, there's no reason a company (e.g. Disney/Nintendo/etc.) can't sue/C&D you, either. In any average case, a threat ends it. But a company can still take you to court and drain your bank account in the process if they choose to do so. Even if they don't win.

It also depends how closely the end result resembles the IP/artist/etc. it's trying to be similar to. There's plenty of fair use cases that've been lost with this exact argument. Hell, there's even precedent for tracing. If there's enough DNA from the reference work in the new piece of work, then there's 100% grounds for a case. Would it ever get that far? Probably not. But it can.

Then there's the whole Suno/Udio lawsuit. Sony, UMG, etc. are suing the aforementioned for basically this exact thing. We're not at a point with AI where we can say if things are suable or not suable with any level of certainty. The laws simply haven't caught up enough for it. Only thing we can say for sure right now is that one can't claim copyright infringement on an AI generated work as it wasn't made by a human (and maybe because AI art is copyright infringement in and of itself?).

Even if companies have the power to sue randomly, it still doesn't make styles (and ideas for that matter) copyrightable. Palworld wouldn't exist in that case, and as for styles... That would be super bad for the great majority of anime (ex. Fairy Tail and Naruto), even more so in recent times now that Anime look so similar with so little stylization that if you shown me two screenshots of two different anime, I wouldn't be able to tell if they're different or not (Unless I watched them ofc).
Anyone can sue anyone for any reason, it still doesn't make what I said wrong.

 

[coffeeaddicted]

wow wow wow i just wanted to know if i create my character via a model in stable diffusion that uses a certain author's style and then add that character to my game will it violate copyright or not

There aren't any lawyers i know on this board that can give you a definitive answer.
One thing for certain, if you became popular and your creation would make tons of money, you will probably be observed by some parties.
If it's something no one has interest, doesn't garner revenue, probably no one will be looking into that.

It's still the Wild West in regard of AI and who owns what.

Breaking the rule and see where it leads. When creating something there is always a risk of having to defend what you created.

 

[osanaiko]

if you are using AI to generate new images of Anon, Debbie, Jenny, etc from "Summertime Saga" to use in your work (or they could be possibly interpreted that way) then doing so would increase your risk of liability.

Ehh? Nani?

For example - using the style of DarkCookie to create your own works, characters, etc using AI and then trying to sell it as part of a product should not be a worry.

Phew!!

 

[Baronluck]

It took Nintendo nearly a year to finally sue Palworld devs, but it was for patent infringement not copyright infringement. Apparently it's easier to get sued for infringing on a patent than copying an art style. Even then, companies probably won't pay attention unless you make boatloads of money. At that point you can afford to fight them lol