And now 3D models have been illegally scrapped from Sketchfab (now owned by Epic Games) by a new AI dataset, even though they had the “noAI” tag applied to them.
It was clear that the “noAI” tag is useless, because the bots scrapping the data just ignore these.
It is relevant here that, by its own description, Midjourney does not interpret prompts as specific instructions to create a particular expressive result. Because Midjourney “does not understand grammar, sentence structure, or words like humans,” it instead converts words and phrases “into smaller pieces, called tokens, that can be compared to its training data and then used to generate an image."
Yes. That is how grammar works. Words are broken into chunks (we call them tokens in Computer Science but call them whatever you want, it doesn’t change the operation). So, if I say, “Photo of a toy horse”, it won’t give me an image of a space shuttle. So, indeed, it DOES use the prompts to generate a particular result.
Yet, a photo is copyrightable because, I guess, pressing a button is far more expressive?
Accordingly, Kashtanova had no reason to recite any limitations of the claim or to provide notes to the Office, for the same reason that photographers do not
ypically recite that they “used a camera” to create an image and authors do not disclaim portions of an image that they used Adobe Photoshop to create or modify.
Does the Copyright Office know that Photoshop has AI filters? How many works are blessed with copyright where the majority of the work is AI? Arguing that “they used Adobe Photoshop” isn’t justification.
This is an amusing if incredibly contradictory ruling that shows just how behind the Copyright Office is regarding state-of-the-art art generation.
Amusing anecdote: if I’m taking a photo and someone bumps into me at random causing me to take a photo of something important (instead of the squirrel), despite anyone’s carping, that image is copyrighted. The art world is filled with “happy accidents” and yet copyright is never denied these works.
Here’s my take on this. The EU (European Union) has already passed a regulation for AI (first of it’s kind), in particular, they are now forcing any Machine Generator of Content to disclose the source of their data. Could be from Artstation, DeviArt, The Web… you name it… if they don’t have the consent from the Authors to use their Work (which obviously they don’t). They’ll get fined and even banned from the continent for stealing copyright work.
This becomes incredible important for 3D Marketplaces such as FAB/UE Marketplace. If Epic, continues to ignore and allow AI content to be sold… they could face a Ban from the European Market and potential lawsuits.
They must publish what their stand is on AI. You either support it or Prohibited, but you just can’t play the fool and do nothing. Creating silly “NoAI” tags ain’t enough.
It didn’t. It will take a while till this will actually become a law. But it got pushed closer recently for it to become a thing.
And just before that they requested sellers on their store to disclose any use of AI for making the asset (there is a separate section for that now). This include any supporting use as well (the request is so broad that if taken to the letter would mean that one would have to write “I searched an error message using google”). Also as a side note they made funny mistake x.com
Though recently rumors like that started circulating:
If that’s true… that will be big.
Here’s Unity latest products. Basically stealing everything from the Web, Artist’s work and beyond.
Introducing Unity Muse and Unity Sentis, AI-powered creativity | Unity Blog
Seems that it’s not just rumours:
In its statement to PC Gamer, Valve said that "The introduction of AI can sometimes make it harder to show a developer has sufficient rights in using AI to create assets, including images, text, and music. In particular, there is some legal uncertainty relating to data used to train AI models. It is the developer’s responsibility to make sure they have the appropriate rights to ship their game.
We know it is a constantly evolving tech, and our goal is not to discourage the use of it on Steam; instead, we’re working through how to integrate it into our already-existing review policies. Stated plainly, our review process is a reflection of current copyright law and policies, not an added layer of our opinion. As these laws and policies evolve over time, so will our process.
That’s changes things (i.e., developers using assets bought on UE Marketplace that have AI generated content in them are at risk of not being able to publish their games to Steam). Would be good if someone from Epic could comment on that (@Unreal_Josh ?)
As a Solo Developer and frequent Buyer on the Marketplace I do NOT acquire 2D Assets, Non Modular 3D Models, nor Non Network Replicated Blueprints and C++ Plugins.
I think thats pretty awesome. Thanks for sharing.
Sure no problem. Lawsuits pilling up on them are going to be pretty awesome too 
AI-generated stuff is almost everywhere on the Marketplace now, and needs to be removed.
If Valve pulls out the banhammer because of this, it shouldnt be sold here to avoid weird situations. (For many assets its not very obvious that its AI stuff… )
It seems like half of all new additions to the marketplace are now unedited generated AI images. Worse still, there is no way to specifically sort out this junk.
It appears that the courts are now working through A.I. lawsuits and distribution platforms like Valve are clamping down. Hopefully, this will encourage Epic to revisit its policies at some point.
We’re muddling over the possible musing of the thought that a meeting might be amenable should we ultimately conjecture that a potential-decision could subsequently be arrived at prior to the implementation of any incipient gathering-of-review for the purposes of attempting to remediate the future-perceived impacts of incoming changes down-the-line which if they ultimately do-arrive, we’d consider the undertaking to likely obligate ourselves to tentatively commit to a plausibly-attainable partial-solution…blah blah blah
Just checked whats new on the marketplace, its full of AI now.
And thats just scratching the surface… (I didnt bother to look closer at other things 
)
Epic just doesnt care, because even the guy who I had proven to be stealing from Genshin impact is still allowed to sell its stuff… which is not very reassuring in the Marketplace… Genshin Impact Assets on the store, Ripped? - #10 by Yaeko
And now we get an AI flood, with assets we cant use anyway because Valve will kick us from steam over it. (or at least the game)
TL:DR: I will not buy stuff in the marketplace anymore, that is newer than 2021.
We’ve got a preliminary ruling on the issue of copyright within the US.
So according to this ruling, it seems that the sellers who pump and dump AI content onto the marketplace don’t own a copyright to the content they are distributing.
However, could you argue that the AI generator terms of service still give sellers permission to distribute generated content?
Alternatively, does this ruling invalidate that TOS since the AI company doesn’t have the rights to grant distribution permission in the first place?
I’d be interested to hear everyone’s thoughts on this.
More news about Steam’s stance about AI… looks like chatgpt is not allowed:
https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/167iied/the_game_ive_spent_35_years_and_my_savings_on_has/
This is getting even more “interesting”:
https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/16r4dik/steam_also_rejects_games_translated_by_ai_details/
I think Epic is bound to adjust its stance on A.I. content. I’m extremely skeptical that hosting mountains of pump-and-dump AI imagery packs in perpetuity makes financial sense.
We recently heard Epic is proactively trimming down their expenses and workforce as they shift to this creator-focused future. I’m encouraged that they’ll take a hard look at their policies around AI too. It’s hard to believe that devs are buying up this avalanche of AI imagery, especially now that many are aware that the largest platform for game distribution strictly bans it.
Epic is privately owned and is not bound to anything 
. Given that Tim’s stance on twitter is mostly positive towards generative AI (including inviting devs to EGS that were rejected by steam due to gen AI use) I doubt we will see any change in that regard.
Where do you get that encouragement from?
In the long run… A.I. itself will eventually protect creator’s intellectual property on the internet. It makes sense that only an advance algorithm could detect, warn and remind anyone using your Artwork about it’s copyright infringement.
If we can trace and follow a unique Bank transaction … then it’s the same thing with any form of digital artwork. AI will hunt and keep a watch on AI generators. So if your beloved daddy Tim follows the generative AI stance, then he will be forced by AI watchers protecting it’s own Markets (Europe, China, etc) and will have no choice but to pull those Assets out or have it’s products Banned. It’s a checkmate move.