Is Application of AI-Powered Art by Students Ethical?

Art has been held in great esteem for many centuries and artists typically take years to perfect their craft. We live in a generation that glorifies Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci, The Birth of Venus by Sandro Botticelli, and Starry Night by van Gogh.

Times have changed. Now, you can generate a decent gem in only a few seconds with a click of a command. AI-generated art is a cause of heated debate online. A simple scroll on social media shows beautiful art created by AI algorithms.

One career that has been affected by all the debate is the art world. Art is a powerful career that spans multiple career paths, from animators, photographers, art teachers, printmakers, curators, graphic designers, and illustrators. Different companies, including college essay writing service UK, are incorporating AI imagery.

What’s the future of creators once AI becomes a mainstay? Why would organizations subcontract art graduates when magnificent illustrations or designs are a few clicks away? What’s the future of art amid AI takeover?

Main Conundrum Surrounding AI-Powered Art

‘It’s theft!’

This is a common consensus made by most real artists of the world. Other artists believe that AI art generators are stealing from human artists. The fact that one can spend months of their lives creating an art piece, whereas someone else can create art in a few seconds, sits right with many.

Let’s recap some conundrums surrounding its practice.

Who Is the Creator?

One common question attributed to generative AI is who the real creator of the content is. The originality and creativity aspect is a major puzzle behind its usage.

Superficially, the proprietary rights of the created images depend on the terms and services of the AI generative platform. Also, the rights set out govern its terms. Users must know whether anyone under any applicable law owns the images created.

There are still question marks over copyright laws that require human authorship for ownership. A recent court case established that no one owns AI-generated works—not even the authors of the AI platform. Therefore, there’s some confusion regarding the authorship of such content.  

Who Gets the Credit?

In contrast, since authoring entails the generation of content, another question that has increasingly arisen is the issue of authorship. A recent case that raises this question is a work sold at an art sale held by Christie’s art auction. The work was an AI-generated platform, which was sold for almost half a million.

However, inherently, the process of producing art in this way is collaborative. Users give commands to particular algorithms to generate art. In other cases, artists train AI models through huge data sets and learning patterns, after which the AI can generate content on its own. This collaborative process blurs the line between human and machine learning authorship when it comes to giving credit.

Is it better to give the AI-generative platform half the credit for creating art or give the human artist who made it all the credit? Either way, AI algorithms are a major part of the final outcome. It brings the artist closer to the machine and puts it into action together.

What’s It Worth?

AI art auctioned off at nearly an arm and a leg means that the artificial artwork has a price. But does it really have value? Moreover, we can set a high price for specific art types just like we can say whether a paper written by is good based on royalwriter review. Please select whether it is right to set a price for an AI image.

A cursory scroll on many NFT sites reveals several digital artworks with cryptocurrency pricing that is equivalent to mind-boggling. Is this auction scenario that happened recently an outlier, or are people honestly willing to spend millions of dollars on virtual images that can be created by developers via code?

What is the correlation between financial value and the value of an art in terms of historical or cultural heritage, rarity, or aesthetic standards? It’s a new way of looking at what people pay for, and honestly, it’s kind of getting a kick out of making some real money. Here are some examples of digital art that is valued so much for not being real ‘art’ in terms of the standard definition.

Is Data Usage Ethical?

There are a few ethical issues about passing digital artwork as art. Firstly, the creation of these types of art involves data, and human artists frequently process personal data, including photos from social media and other platforms. AI gets cognizant with unrestricted access to personal data, which automatically creates concerns about privacy, data use, and abuse.

Most governments call for guidelines and regulations for AI usage in art. These regulations enforce ethical conduct, data protection, and potential misuse of AI images. These guidelines enhance user privacy to avoid any potential misuse.

Can Humans and AI Co-Exist?

AI is here to stay. The best we can do is harmoniously incorporate it as an assistant in the creative process. Human artists can figure out ways to use AI algorithms to help automate repetitive tasks, including sketching, color grading, and drafting.

Delegating these tasks to AI can reduce the time and energy artists spend on conceptualizing and refining ideas. The generated art piece combines the power of human and machine creativity. The end output is fascinating results that paint alternative perspectives to captivate the art market again.

Also, it tones down any inquiries about the ownership, copyright, and ethics regarding its usage. Further technological advancement in AI can generate original works that challenge notions of past authorship.

Should We Be Wary of AI Imagery?

The art world isn’t the only field shocked by the uprising of AI technology. Other fields are reaping the benefits of AI applications, including virtual assistants, autonomous vehicles, fraud detection, chatbots, and military intelligence.

There is no reason to see the art world through rose-colored glasses: some ethical issues can require discussions of advisability. While many are debating whether AI can replace human creativity, there is room for partnership with human intelligence.

The unsupervised use of AI images can prove harmful to graphic designers, illustrators, photographers, animators, curators, and professional artists’ career. Thus, it needs appropriate regulation and guidance to prevent further invasion into the art world.

What’s Coming Next?

AI art generation is going to see more growth as it’s already showing cross-functional utilities on different fields. Art isn’t any different. It is a technology slated to change the future. It is disruptive to policymakers, creators and artists, and companies. Regular auditing and regulations should be in place to eradicate such ethical concerns.

No Comments Yet.