/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6421485
>And you can't "actively" change what it puts out, you can only influence it
This is definitely true to an extent, but I would argue that the ability to iterate on a theme however many times it takes to get what you want is a form of actively changing the output. But I don't really see how his point is relevant. I'm not arguing that the person doing the prompting is fully in control of the machine.

>I can't just take the design for Mickey Mouse and use it to create an original character just because it's "out there"
Yes, that's true. You can't trace his likeness or D*sney will be all over your ass. But AI art doesn't trace. It quite literally uses a piece (or pieces) of art as an inspiration, and then creates something new using this inspiration as a reference. In that way, it is very close to an actual artist. This is why this current situation is such a gray area. If it's not illegal for someone to take Disney's style and use it as inspiration for their own art, then why should it be illegal for a computer to do the same?