Artificial Intelligence (AI) continues to impact a multitude of avenues but few are more compelling, and controversial than that with the medium or art. Algorithms are already composing paintings, music and even poems but AI made art has also become popular. This is an impressive technological leap forward, but it asks a fundamentally ethical question of can AI ever really make anything or are they just imitating the past human labor? And if it is the latter, what does that say for originality and copyright of art created?
What Is AI Art?
AI Art: Works using algorithms that learn from patterns found in more existing data to create new content. Using this as an example, artists can feed images of artworks or music samples into a program and the system will create something “fresh”. But, usually it crosses the line of inspiration to imitation. It does not “think” or “feel” like the human artist, but gives you a result based on all this data including patterns, styles and structures. So, when it creates, is that real creating or just Remixing what it’s been fed?
The Problem of Originality
Art is natively thought to be a means of self-expression and until the 21st century, it has been focused on originality. Art is an altogether personal manifestation based on individual experience, emotions and perceptions. On the other side, AI algorithms are made up of data points which show not a single bit of emotions or experiences. For example, if an AI model is exposed to thousands of pictures painted in Van Gogh — he will be able to produce a painting similar to Van Gogh. Though can art be called original?
This becomes even more difficult to answer because while AI can mimic, the uniqueness comes in which data novel works were trained on. Yes, AI art is not true creativity as it does not have the depth and intention of us humans; all they really do is interpolate on what instruction it’s been given by reading those massive amounts of data set…falling short from creating something out of nothing. This point leads nicely to the major issue as well: are works created by AI not inherently artistic, really art?
Ownership and Copyright Worry
Another ethical issue relates to copyright and intellectual property. Who Gets Copyright If an AI Paints the Picture? The human who educated the algorithm? The software developers who worked on it? Or no one at all? To the extent copyright can protect AI interpretations ( and at least in cases where interpretation involves novel contributions or aspects that should be strongly defended), current law may not work completely as intended.
But what if by chance an AI artist accidentally copies from the existing work. In the worst scenario, AI-generated content has looked so similar to copyrighted material that it has sent a cease and desist letter! As in, if an AI were to pen a song that sounded remarkably like a popular track from some years past would they be infringing copyright or merely “inspired by”? Stories like that bring into focus why we need clear guidance about AI-generated content.
Creativity or Computation?
I think the question at center of this debate is whether or not designing constitutes creativity. Is AI creative or just a cool tool? It includes construction and creativity, and also a call to action or something responding on purpose. AI can produce beautiful artwork + write poetry that feels deep, but it lacks the main motivation behind creativity — a story or meaning in those pixels or words. AI is driven by algorithms and data, it does not have any emotions or meaning in order to convey some message.
Others, however, suggest that AI simply represents the next version of creative tools or artist software — so not much different than a paintbrush or camera. Much in the way that software is employed by digital artists to realize visions, artificial intelligence has much potential for legacy forms of art. This formulation puts creativity in how humans use AI, not in technology.
Charting a Course into the Future of AI Art
With AI generated art on the rise, what does this mean for how we understand art in a digital age? Should we define creativity to also include algorithms, or are those the purview of human expression? What is clear, however, is that the line between inspiration and imitation will only become increasingly muddled as AI becomes more intelligent.
It is crucial for creators, lawmakers and tech developers to open dialogue with each other in order to navigate this ethical maze. With AI entering the realm of creativity, clear guidelines will need to be developed and policed around its usage both in regards to protecting intellectual property and ensuring how AI-generated art is made.
Finally, AI art forces us to address fundamental philosophical questions of what it means for machines to be creative or original and even human. What machines are capable of is only half the story: The other, at least as important part, is how we position and contextualize these abilities within our conception of art & culture. And maybe with that AI has finally given us a magnum opus, talking about the future of creativity itself.
