this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2025
946 points (91.4% liked)

Technology

68867 readers
4347 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Potentially unpopular opinion, but I don't think art or artstyles should be copyrighted.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

They aren't, thankfully

[–] [email protected] 49 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

Will you guys shut up about this?

There are genuinely some big issues with AI that need to be addressed but they are drowned out by morons melting down over people making dumb little Ghibli style images for their own amusement.

Shout about insurance companies using AI to auto dent people's medical claims, not about some dude Turnjng a picture of his cat into anime style

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 weeks ago

Its attacking on a cultural front and we will move on in a week. People still care more about insurance companies, trust me.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

Nah information should be free. Ghibli doesn't own its style. Fuck this copyright propaganda machine.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Figures. The wealthy could never fully buy power with just wealth, there was always someone smarter that was a threat. Now, they can just buy intelligence, thanks to AI, and crush everything else with their sheer weight.

Is this the great filter? The ultimate fate of all species?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Sucks because ghibli has always been really protective of its ip and in the future it maybe made harder and harder to watch it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

I think it is also a kind of "you did a nice thing there, so I'll act as if I can do the same" display.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Cool, another preachy argument that jumps to irrational conclusions. Because Ghibli?

It is a display of power: You as an artist, an animator, an illustrator, a writer, any creative person are powerless. We will take what we want and do what we want. Because we can.

Uh…we always could & did. Imitators have been doing that since always, long before LLMs. No one owns an art style.

This is the idea of might makes right. The banner that every totalitarian and fascist government rallied under.

That's the argument? Plagiarism & imitating art styles is fascism? Wow! The rest of the article is worse.

Please make the word fascism more meaningless.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago

Exactly this is so frustrating that people fall in for copyright propaganda just because "big tech is bad".

Ghibli doesn't own a style. It has sbeen made by thousands of animators and millions of illustrations and influences before them.

This is not the way to get back at big tech.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Imitators have been doing that since always, long before LLMs

Fill me in a bit. Are you under the impression that artists are particularly okay with/enjoy people imitating their art style?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Are we pretending this is new & their opinion matters in some new way it hasn't before?

There might be an argument to demand licensing royalties on intellectual property. Is that too capitalist? Maybe it's fine if we work that into the word fascism somehow, wear it out a bit more to hit that sweet spot. Ooh.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No. We're acting as if their opinion always mattered just as much as it does now.

While your style is not, can not, and should not be your intellectual property, you should have the right to say "I don't want you to imitate my exact style" and people should respect that.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

We’re acting as if their opinion always mattered just as much as it does now.

So not at all: got it.

you should have the right to say “I don’t want you to imitate my exact style”

You do.

people should respect that

"That's just like your opinion, man." meme goes here.

The argument seems to amount to "stop using/imitating my work to express yourself in ways I don't like", which is futile & senseless.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So, to recap, your position is this:

Artists do not deserve the respect that would allow them to be creative unfettered. Gotcha.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

How does "respect" "allow" an artist "unfettered creativity"? How exactly is instructing others how to treat/imitate their work & expecting their wishes to be fulfilled promoting "unfettered creativity"? Seems like the opposite. Can you break that down into logic?

Are you suggesting artists are fragile beings whose creativity only exists at the mercy of our "respect" and the slightest disrespect breaks them? That seems rather self-important.

I submit that artists don't need our respect to be creative: the suggestion is belittling to artists.

The real point is the article fails to argue well.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I didn't say they needed respect to be creative. I said they needed respect to be creative unfettered.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

they needed respect to be creative unfettered

Respectfully, I don't see what unfettered here is adding. I clarified by editing the earlier comment to request to explain the logic.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (7 children)

Do you know what the word unfettered means?

Edit to add: Why are you arguing for disrespecting people's wishes?

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

As an artist, when people imitate me, I take it as flattery.

When a machine imitates me, I take it as an insult to life itself.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

When a machine imitates me, I take it as an insult to life itself.

I might be flattered that someone bothered to make a machine do that. Massaging software to do that also takes skill?

When GitHub Copilot lifts my opensource code, I'm not offended. I only cringe a bit when it's bad code I regret committing.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I take it as flattery

I respect your position, and I appreciate people who are willing to share their creativity in an inspiring way like that.

However, others don't see it as flattery. Particularly in eastern cultures, it is seen as mockery or plagiarism. You can choose to disagree about why they don't want you to imitate their style, but you should always respect the request.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If eastern cultures don't like imitation, why are there a million identical isekai light novels with an average joe who dies, reincarnates in a slightly altered Dungeons and Dragons world, and gets a harem of women with huge breasts whose personalities are taken straight from TVtropes?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

This is an absolutely rational take.

Individual, noncommercial imitation is flattery.

LLM ripoff is exactly that.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

An insult to life itself.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Title made by the least pretentious American liberal

[–] [email protected] 53 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

What kind of article is this? They misattributed a quote, then admitted the misattributed the quote, then doubled down on it, and then threw in a political message.

People, this is rage bait. It's yellow journalism. Don't fall for this shit.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›