Artists vs AI: A Response to Misuse

⚡

Key Takeaways

1Artists are discovering that their works have been used to train AIs without their consent.

2Kirk Wallace Johnson found that his books were pirated and incorporated into a chatbot.

3He expresses anger and concern over the unauthorized use of his work by companies.

💡Why it matters — The struggle of artists against the misuse of their works by AI could redefine copyright in the digital age.

Artists vs. AI: A Response to Misuse

Artists whose work has been co-opted by AI are turning to the courts. Kirk Wallace Johnson, like many other artists, discovered his name in a dataset published by The Atlantic, containing works used to train AIs. His books, such as The Feather Thief and The Fishermen and the Dragon, have been pirated and used to fuel a chatbot. He feels a mix of anger, concern, and a desire for revenge against these large companies that have amassed fortunes using his intellectual property.

Johnson proactively reached out to the law firm Susman Godfrey, which is already pursuing action against Anthropic on behalf of authors, as he sees their lawsuit as a "middle finger on behalf of all those who have tried to create something."

The Artists' Struggle

Johnson is just one of many authors, musicians, illustrators, and artists from all backgrounds fighting against AI in the courts. The lawsuits they have filed primarily target companies on copyright grounds, although some have explored other avenues, such as violations of terms of service. Some cases have dragged on for years, while others have been resolved more quickly. Artists have experienced both victories and defeats, particularly around the definition of fair use.

Early Legal Actions

Illustrator and cartoonist Sarah Andersen was one of the first to directly confront the giants of AI. She describes her comic Sarah’s Scribbles as deeply personal, a "culmination of my education, the comics I devoured as a child, and the many little decisions that make up my life." Along with Karla Ortiz, Kelly McKernan, and other visual artists, she filed a class action lawsuit against Stability, Midjourney, DeviantArt, and Runway AI. This lawsuit has been ongoing since January 2023, shortly after the launch of image generators like Stable Diffusion and Midjourney.

Other artists, encouraged by Andersen's efforts, have launched their own legal attacks against major AI players, including Meta, Google, Anthropic, and the AI music generator Suno. Overall, artists are optimistic about the outcomes of their individual cases and hope their efforts will help guide the courts toward legal safeguards.

Artists' Concerns

The problem, according to many artists, is that the CEOs of large tech companies and those building AI models do not understand or respect art. Andersen feels "violated" and describes it as a "reduction of the work of my life to an algorithm." Author Andrea Bartz, known for her novels like We Were Never Here, shares a similar sentiment: "I felt violated, shocked, alarmed."

Sam Kogon, who prefers to be known for his pop rock music infused with Americana, is the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit against Google's AI music engine, Lyria. He states, "They devalue our work," adding that this will disadvantage many musicians. Kogon and other independent musicians accuse Google of violating its own terms of service.

Accusations Against Google

Kogon's lawyers argue that Google improperly used its Content ID system and YouTube data to train Lyria and ProducerAI. Google has primarily declined to comment on specific allegations but has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, claiming that YouTube's terms of service grant it broad rights to "reproduce, distribute, and prepare derivative works."

Kogon criticizes this position, pointing out that YouTube's terms of service change regularly and users do not have the option to negotiate.

Stakes for Independent Artists

Independent artists and the creative class are those most likely to lose. When personalities like Richard Kadrey and Sarah Silverman sued Meta for using their books to train its AI Llama without consent, their complaint highlighted that this could prevent new authors from gaining recognition.

Johnson warns that the real danger is not that AI will replace all great artists, but that it could produce mediocre works that flood the market.

Judicial Decisions

In the case of Bartz vs. Anthropic, the company was found guilty of copyright violations for using pirated ebooks. It agreed to pay the largest settlement ever recorded in a copyright case — $1.5 billion — and to destroy its collection of pirated ebooks. However, the use of secondhand books to train models raises complex questions about fair use.

Bartz hopes that future courts will recognize the stakes involved. Despite setbacks, she considers her case against Anthropic a significant first victory for creators against an AI company.

Conclusion

Krystle Delgado, an attorney specializing in entertainment and intellectual property, is optimistic about the future. She believes that AI companies are becoming increasingly nervous in the face of lawsuits. Surveys show that the public desires at least more transparency regarding AI. Even if artists win their legal battles, all express concerns about the future of art in the age of AI.