AI, Artificial Intelligence, GenAI, Large Language Models, or whatever else you want to call them, or they want to be called. There’s a lot of talk about it, whether we might end up fighting Terminators, or trapped in the Matrix. Whether they are secretly in charge already, if they are sentient, should have rights, or are just a tool, to be used and controlled by us. It’s all a very big talking point now, and I’m happy to have a conversation about any of these points, but I think there’s one very important thing that has to be acknowledged, whether you believe that AI is our savior or out oppressor, that could have a big effect on human creators as much as the tech itself.

There has been a lot of talk about how these “AI” (using the general term, as I will from now on) actually generate images. They aren’t like humans, who can imagine anything they want, and then paint, build, sculpt, or craft that thing. They have to look at things and absorb them so they can replicate something like it. As a result here, there are people saying that AI stole their work, or that many AI images are near-perfect replicas of photos and art that already exists.

To try and stop their work being plagiarized, many creators have started to use “anti-AI” labels, telling these machines to keep their hands off their work, and not to copy them. I doubt it really works, not just because these AI are unlikely to take notice of them, but because they are on the internet, where most images can be viewed and copied without credit.

While trying to prevent AI doing this might seem like trying to stop an elephant with a butterfly net, it’s unlikely to end there. At some point, probably very soon, there will be court cases against the use of AI to copy, or replicate a voice, piece of art or writing, etc. And one of these cases will be by a person or company that is big enough to get attention, raising awareness of it, and having more artists and individuals get on the bandwagon to try and sue the AI for using their copyrighted work.

This might all seem fair, and I have to admit, plagiarism isn’t a nice thing. Even some of my articles have been copied on cheap websites, literally copy-pasted onto them. It must be even more annoying for people who’ve spent hours crafting work that then gets put out by others, often with a view to making a quick buck, selling e-books, or whatever.

But here is a problem. As an AI version of Isaac Newton might have said, “Every action has an equal and opposite overreaction.”

And that is sadly the case. While these lawsuits might be filed with the intention of protecting intellectual property rights, they will no doubt have bigger effects than what they set out to stop.

Consider this for a moment. AI doesn’t *exactly* copy. It just takes a great deal of influence from multiple sources. Now, maybe that’s from a particular source, because that source is very big in the field asked for, which might be niche (e.g. cyberpunk art).

But I want you to think very carefully about this: have you ever *taken influence* from something to use in your work? I have, and I continue to do so.

There are already laws that prevent outright plagiarism, and protect intellectual property rights, so you can’t, say, write a story about Gandalf from Lord of the Rings, and publish it with all names and places the same, and make money out of it. But you can publish a story about a wizard who is inspired by Gandalf, providing there are enough differences between him and the Tolkien’s creation, and that it is not set in Middle-earth, etc.

Most companies that own these IP rights are pretty open with fans, allowing them to cosplay and the like, so long as no one profits from it, which makes a lot of sense. But there are a lot of people who profit from it in some way.

Sticking with LOTR, take a look on Etsy. There are hundreds of paintings, embroideries, models, inspired by the works of Tolkien. They are painting the Shire, knitting Frodo, modelling Orthanc, carving Isengard. They are all, in some way, inspired by Middle-earth, by his own art, or by the films made by Peter Jackson. Even if they are not direct copies, or feature a place we’ve never seen, they are still *taking inspiration* from these things.

To be clear, I am not speaking against any of this. They are often extremely well-made, and I don’t believe they do any real harm to these IPs. In fact they probably help, by keeping fans engaged in real ways with their fandoms.

The problem is whether or not they will remain that way with the response to AI. Most people would make a distinction between an AI “artist” and a practical artist, but for how long? People were treated differently when they made digital art, as it wasn’t physical, but is now commonplace, and they are most at risk from AI duplicates.

Also, most people would make a distinction between an individual working on their own, possibly with no financial reward, versus a company that is monetizing their AI content.

An even more worrying point is the copying of famous voices and faces to make videos. While these do have worrying implications for forgeries, what if they are done for parody, or simply in the same way a YouTuber might dress up as a famous movie character, like Darth Vader to make their videos?

While most people can clearly see a distinction in these things, it’s more likely that they will come to court cases, and the law will have to make its judgement. In these cases, the current laws might not be up to the standard, and so either leave holes to be exploited, or require new laws to be made.

Whether you believe AI is a good thing or not. Whether you use it or not. Whether or not you think we need more laws, they will undoubtedly happen, and as a result, it’s hugely important to remember than real human creators could be affected by any overreach, or by companies overreacting to the AI problem by clamping down on any unlicenced use of their IPs. As AI becomes an ever more integral part of our lives (as seems unstoppable now), we need to be sure that the safeguards we make against it are really protecting us from its worst aspects, and not just making it harder for humans who get caught in the legal web.

Thanks for reading! If you enjoyed this and would like to support my writing, you can do so at the link below.