r/DefendingAIArt • • Jul 07 '25

Defending AI Court cases where AI copyright claims were dismissed (reference)

143 Upvotes

Ello folks, I wanted to make a brief post outlining all of the current cases and previous court cases which have been dropped for images/books for plaintiffs attempting to claim copyright on their own works.

This contains a mix of a couple of reasons which will be added under the applicable links. I've added 6 so far but I'm sure I'll find more eventually which I'll amend as needed. If you need a place to show how a lot of copyright or direct stealing cases have been dropped, this is the spot.

HERE is a further list of all ongoing current lawsuits, too many to add here.

HERE is a big list of publishers suing AI platforms, as well as publishers that made deals with AI platforms. Again too many to add here.

12/25 - I'll be going through soon and seeing if any can be updated.

Edit: Thanks for pinning.

(Best viewed on Desktop)

---

1) Robert Kneschke vs LAION:

STATUS FINISHED
TYPE IMAGES
RESULT DISMISSED FOR FAIR USE
FURTHER DETAILS The lawsuit was initially started against LAION in Germany, as Robert believed his images were being used in the LAION dataset without his permission, however, due to the non-profit research nature of LAION, this ruling was dropped.
DIRECT QUOTE The Hamburg District Court has ruled that LAION, a non-profit organisation, did not infringe copyright law by creating a dataset for training artificial intelligence (AI) models through web scraping publicly available images, as this activity constitutes a legitimate form of text and data mining (TDM) for scientific research purposes. The photographer Robert Kneschke (the ‘claimant’) brought a lawsuit before the Hamburg District Court against LAION, a non-profit organisation that created a dataset for training AI models (the ‘defendant’). According to the claimant’s allegations, LAION had infringed his copyright by reproducing one of his images without permission as part of the dataset creation process.
LINK https://www.euipo.europa.eu/en/law/recent-case-law/germany-hamburg-district-court-310-o-22723-laion-v-robert-kneschke

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

2) Anthropic vs Andrea Bartz et al:

STATUS COMPLETE AI WIN
TYPE BOOKS
RESULT SETTLEMENT AGREED ON SECONDARY CLAIM
FURTHER DETAILS The lawsuit filed claimed that Anthropic trained its models on pirated content, in this case the form of books. This lawsuit was also dropped, citing that the nature of the trained AI’s was transformative enough to be fair use. However, a separate trial will take place to determine if Anthropic breached piracy rules by storing the books in the first place.
DIRECT QUOTE "The court sided with Anthropic on two fronts. Firstly, it held that the purpose and character of using books to train LLMs was spectacularly transformative, likening the process to human learning. The judge emphasized that the AI model did not reproduce or distribute the original works, but instead analysed patterns and relationships in the text to generate new, original content. Because the outputs did not substantially replicate the claimants’ works, the court found no direct infringement."
LINK https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25982181-authors-v-anthropic-ruling/
LINK TWO (UPDATE) 01.09.25 https://www.wired.com/story/anthropic-settles-copyright-lawsuit-authors/

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

3) Sarah Andersen et al vs Stability AI:

STATUS ONGOING (TAKEN LEAVE TO AMEND THE LAWSUIT)
TYPE IMAGES
RESULT INITAL CLAIMS DISMISSED BUT PLANTIFF CAN AMEND THEIR AGUMENT, HOWEVER, THIS WOULD NEED THEM TO PROVE THAT GENERATED CONTENT DIRECTLY INFRINGED ON THIER COPYRIGHT.
FURTHER DETAILS A case raised against Stability AI with plaintiffs arguing that the images generated violated copyright infringement. 
DIRECT QUOTE Judge Orrick agreed with all three companies that the images the systems actually created likely did not infringe the artists’ copyrights. He allowed the claims to be amended but said he was “not convinced” that allegations based on the systems’ output could survive without showing that the images were substantially similar to the artists’ work.
LINK https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/judge-pares-down-artists-ai-copyright-lawsuit-against-midjourney-stability-ai-2023-10-30/
LINK TWO https://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/consumer-products/mobile-apps/artists-sue-companies-behind-ai-image-generators

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

4) Getty images vs Stability AI:

STATUS FINISHED
TYPE IMAGES
RESULT CLAIM DROPPED DUE TO WEAK EVIDENCE, AI WIN
FURTHER DETAILS Getty images filed a lawsuit against Stability AI for two main reasons: Claiming Stability AI used millions of copyrighted images to train their model without permission and claiming many of the generated works created were too similar to the original images they were trained off. These claims were dropped as there wasn’t sufficient enough evidence to suggest either was true. Getty's copyright case was narrowed to secondary infringement, reflecting the difficulty it faced in proving direct copying by an AI model trained outside the UK.
DIRECT QUOTES “The training claim has likely been dropped due to Getty failing to establish a sufficient connection between the infringing acts and the UK jurisdiction for copyright law to bite,” Ben Maling, a partner at law firm EIP, told TechCrunch in an email. “Meanwhile, the output claim has likely been dropped due to Getty failing to establish that what the models reproduced reflects a substantial part of what was created in the images (e.g. by a photographer).” In Getty’s closing arguments, the company’s lawyers said they dropped those claims due to weak evidence and a lack of knowledgeable witnesses from Stability AI. The company framed the move as strategic, allowing both it and the court to focus on what Getty believes are stronger and more winnable allegations.
LINK Techcrunch article

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

5) Sarah Silverman et al vs Meta AI: 

STATUS FINISHED
TYPE BOOKS
RESULT META AI USE DEEMED TO BE FAIR USE, NO EVIDENCE TO SHOW MARKET BEING DILUTED
FURTHER DETAILS Another case dismissed, however this time the verdict rested more on the plaintiff’s arguments not being correct, not providing enough evidence that the generated content would dilute the market of the trained works, not the verdict of the judge's ruling on the argued copyright infringement.
DIRECT QUOTE The US district judge Vince Chhabria, in San Francisco, said in his decision on the Meta case that the authors had not presented enough evidence that the technology company’s AI would cause “market dilution” by flooding the market with work similar to theirs. As a consequence Meta’s use of their work was judged a “fair use” – a legal doctrine that allows use of copyright protected work without permission – and no copyright liability applied."
LINK https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jun/26/meta-wins-ai-copyright-lawsuit-as-us-judge-rules-against-authors

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

6) Disney/Universal vs Midjourney:

STATUS ONGOING (TBC)
TYPE IMAGES
RESULT EXPECTED WIN FOR UNIVERSAL/DISNEY
FURTHER DETAILS This one will be a bit harder I suspect, with the IP of Darth Vader being very recognisable character, I believe this court case compared to the others will sway more in the favour of Disney and Universal. But I could be wrong.
DIRECT QUOTE "Midjourney backlashed at the claims quoting: "Midjourney also argued that the studios are trying to “have it both ways,” using AI tools themselves while seeking to punish a popular AI service."
LINK 1 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg5vjqdm1ypo
LINK 2 (UPDATE) https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/midjourney-slams-lawsuit-filed-by-disney-to-prevent-ai-training-cant-have-it-both-ways-1234749231

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

7) Warnerbros vs Midjourney:

STATUS ONGOING (TBC)
TYPE IMAGES
RESULT EXPECTED WIN FOR WARNERBROS
FURTHER DETAILS In the complaint, Warner Bros. Discovery's legal team alleges that "Midjourney already possesses the technological means and measures that could prevent its distribution, public display, and public performance of infringing images and videos. But Midjourney has made a calculated and profit-driven decision to offer zero protection to copyright owners even though Midjourney knows about the breathtaking scope of its piracy and copyright infringement." Elsewhere, they argue, "Evidently, Midjourney will not stop stealing Warner Bros. Discovery’s intellectual property until a court orders it to stop. Midjourney’s large-scale infringement is systematic, ongoing, and willful, and Warner Bros. Discovery has been, and continues to be, substantially and irreparably harmed by it."
DIRECT QUOTE “Midjourney is blatantly and purposefully infringing copyrighted works, and we filed this suit to protect our content, our partners, and our investments.”
LINK 1 https://www.polygon.com/warner-bros-sues-midjourney/
LINK 2 https://www.scribd.com/document/911515490/WBD-v-Midjourney-Complaint-Ex-a-FINAL-1#fullscreen&from_embed

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

8) Raw Story Media, Inc. et al v. OpenAI Inc.

STATUS DISMISSED
RESULT AI WIN, LACK OF CONCRETE EVIDENCE TO BRING THE SUIT
FURTHER DETAILS Another case dismissed, failing to prove the evidence which was brought against Open AI
DIRECT QUOTE "A New York federal judge dismissed a copyright lawsuit brought by Raw Story Media Inc. and Alternet Media Inc. over training data for OpenAI Inc.‘s chatbot on Thursday because they lacked concrete injury to bring the suit."
LINK ONE https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2024cv01514/616533/178/
LINK TWO https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13477468840560396988&q=raw+story+media+v.+openai

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

9) Kadrey v. Meta Platforms, Inc:

STATUS DISMISSED
TYPE BOOKS
RESULT AI WIN
FURTHER DETAILS
DIRECT QUOTE District court dismisses authors’ claims for direct copyright infringement based on derivative work theory, vicarious copyright infringement and violation of Digital Millennium Copyright Act and other claims based on allegations that plaintiffs’ books were used in training of Meta’s artificial intelligence product, LLaMA.
LINK ONE https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2023/12/richard-kadrey-v-meta-platforms-inc

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

10) Tremblay v. OpenAI (books)

STATUS DISMISSED
TYPE BOOKS
RESULT AI WIN
FURTHER DETAILS First, the court dismissed plaintiffs’ claim against OpenAI for vicarious copyright infringement based on allegations that the outputs its users generate on ChatGPT are infringing.
DIRECT QUOTE The court rejected the conclusory assertion that every output of ChatGPT is an infringing derivative work, finding that plaintiffs had failed to allege “what the outputs entail or allege that any particular output is substantially similar – or similar at all – to [plaintiffs’] books.”  Absent facts plausibly establishing substantial similarity of protected expression between the works in suit and specific outputs, the complaint failed to allege any direct infringement by users for which OpenAI could be secondarily liable. 
LINK ONE https://www.clearyiptechinsights.com/2024/02/court-dismisses-most-claims-in-authors-lawsuit-against-openai/

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

11) Financial Times vs Perplexity

STATUS ONGOING (FAIRLY NEW)
TYPE JOURNALISTS CONTENT ON WEBSITES
RESULT ONGOING (TBC)
FURTHER DETAILS Japanese media group Nikkei, alongside daily newspaper The Asahi Shimbun, has filed a lawsuit claiming that San Francisco-based Perplexity used their articles without permission, including content behind paywalls, since at least June 2024. The media groups are seeking an injunction to stop Perplexity from reproducing their content and to force the deletion of any data already used. They are also seeking damages of 2.2 billion yen (£11.1 million) each.
DIRECT QUOTE “This course of Perplexity’s actions amounts to large-scale, ongoing ‘free riding’ on article content that journalists from both companies have spent immense time and effort to research and write, while Perplexity pays no compensation,” they said. “If left unchecked, this situation could undermine the foundation of journalism, which is committed to conveying facts accurately, and ultimately threaten the core of democracy.”
LINK ONE https://bmmagazine.co.uk/news/nikkei-sues-perplexity-ai-copyright/

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

12) 'Writers' vs Microsoft

STATUS ONGOING (FAIRLY NEW)
TYPE BOOKS
RESULT ONGOING (TBC)
FURTHER DETAILS A group of authors has filed a lawsuit against Microsoft, accusing the tech giant of using copyrighted works to train its large language model (LLM). The class action complaint filed by several authors and professors, including Pulitzer prize winner Kai Bird and Whiting award winner Victor LaVelle, claims that Microsoft ignored the law by downloading around 200,000 copyrighted works and feeding it to the company’s Megatron-Turing Natural Language Generation model. The end result, the plaintiffs claim, is an AI model able to generate expressions that mimic the authors’ manner of writing and the themes in their work.
DIRECT QUOTE “Microsoft’s commercial gain has come at the expense of creators and rightsholders,” the lawsuit states. The complaint seeks to not just represent the plaintiffs, but other copyright holders under the US Copyright Act whose works were used by Microsoft for this training.
LINK ONE https://www.siliconrepublic.com/business/microsoft-lawsuit-ai-copyright-kai-bird-victor-lavelle

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

13) Disney, Universal, Warner Bros vs MiniMax

STATUS ONGOING (FAIRLY NEW)
TYPE IMAGE / VIDEO
RESULT ONGOING (TBC)
FURTHER DETAILS Sept 16 (Reuters) - Walt Disney (DIS.N), Comcast's (CMCSA.O), Universal and Warner Bros Discovery (WBD.O), have jointly filed a copyright lawsuit against China's MiniMax alleging that its image- and video-generating service Hailuo AI was built from intellectual property stolen from the three major Hollywood studios.The suit, filed in the district court in California on Tuesday, claims MiniMax "audaciously" used the studios' famous copyrighted characters to market Hailuo as a "Hollywood studio in your pocket" and advertise and promote its service.
DIRECT QUOTE "A responsible approach to AI innovation is critical, and today's lawsuit against MiniMax again demonstrates our shared commitment to holding accountable those who violate copyright laws, wherever they may be based," the companies said in a statement.
LINK ONE https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/disney-universal-warner-bros-discovery-sue-chinas-minimax-copyright-infringement-2025-09-16/

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

14) Universal Music Group (UMG) vs Udio

STATUS FINISHED
TYPE AUDIO
RESULT SETTLEMENT AGREED
FURTHER DETAILS A settlement has been made between UMG and Udio in a lawsuit by UMG that sees the two companies working together.
DIRECT QUOTE "Universal Music Group and AI song generation platform Udio have reached a settlement in a copyright infringement lawsuit and have agreed to collaborate on new music creation, the two companies said in a joint statement. Universal and Udio say they have reached “a compensatory legal settlement” as well as new licence deals for recorded music and publishing that “will provide further revenue opportunities for UMG artists and songwriters.” Financial terms of the settlement haven't been disclosed."
LINK ONE https://www.msn.com/en-za/news/other/universal-music-group-and-ai-music-firm-udio-settle-lawsuit-and-announce-new-music-platform/ar-AA1Pz59e?ocid=finance-verthp-feeds

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

15) Reddit vs Perplexity AI

STATUS ONGOING (FAIRLY NEW)
TYPE Website Scraping
RESULT (TBA)
FURTHER DETAILS Reddit opened up a lawsuit against Perplexity AI (and others) about the scraping of their website to train AI models.
DIRECT QUOTE "The case is one of many filed by content owners against tech companies over the alleged misuse of their copyrighted material to train AI systems. Reddit filed a similar lawsuit against AI start-up Anthropic in June that is still ongoing. "Our approach remains principled and responsible as we provide factual answers with accurate AI, and we will not tolerate threats against openness and the public interest," Perplexity said in a statement. "AI companies are locked in an arms race for quality human content - and that pressure has fueled an industrial-scale 'data laundering' economy," Reddit chief legal officer Ben Lee said in a statement."
LINK ONE https://www.reuters.com/world/reddit-sues-perplexity-scraping-data-train-ai-system-2025-10-22/
LINK TWO https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/xmpjezjawvr/REDDIT%20PERPLEXITY%20LAWSUIT%20complaint.pdf

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

16) Getty images vs Stability AI (UK this time):

STATUS Finished
TYPE IMAGES
RESULT "Stability Largely Wins"
FURTHER DETAILS Stability AI has mostly prevailed against Getty Images in a British court battle over intellectual property
DIRECT QUOTE "Justice Joanna Smith said in her ruling that Getty's trademark claims “succeed (in part)” but that her findings are "both historic and extremely limited in scope." Stability argued that the case doesn’t belong in the United Kingdom because the AI model's training technically happened elsewhere, on computers run by U.S. tech giant Amazon. It also argued that “only a tiny proportion” of the random outputs of its AI image-generator “look at all similar” to Getty’s works. Getty withdrew a key part of its case against Stability AI during the trial as it admitted there was no evidence the training and development of AI text-to-image product Stable Diffusion took place in the UK.
DIRECT QUOTE TWO In addition a claim of secondary infringement of copyright was dismissed, The judge (Mrs Justice Joanna Smith) ruled: “An AI model such as Stable Diffusion which does not store or reproduce any copyright works (and has never done so) is not an ‘infringing copy’.” She declined to rule on the passing off claim and ruled in favour of some of Getty’s claims about trademark infringement related to watermarks.
LINK ONE https://www.independent.co.uk/news/getty-images-london-high-court-seattle-amazon-b2858201.html
LINK TWO https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/getty-images-largely-loses-landmark-uk-lawsuit-over-ai-image-generator-2025-11-04/
LINK THREE https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/nov/04/stabilty-ai-high-court-getty-images-copyright
LINK FOUR https://pressgazette.co.uk/media_law/getty-vs-stability-ai-copyright-ruling-uk/

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

My own thoughts

So far the precent seems to be that most cases of claims from plaintiffs is that direct copyright is dismissed, due to outputted works not bearing any resemblance to the original works. Or being able to prove their works were in the datasets in the first place.

However it has been noted that some of these cases have been dismissed due to wrongly structured arguments on the plaintiffs part.

The issue is, because some of these models are taught on such large amounts of data, some artist/photographer/author attempting to prove that their works were used in training has an almost impossible task. Hell even 5 images added would only make up 0.0000001% of the dataset of 5 billion (LAION).

I could be wrong but I think Sarah Andersen will have a hard time directly proving that any generated output directly infringes on their work, unless they specifically went out of their way to generate a piece similar to theirs, which could be used as evidence against them, in a sense of. "Well yeah, you went out of your way to make a prompt that specifically used your style"

In either case, trying to create a lawsuit against an AI company for directly fringing on specifically plaintiff's work won't work, since their work is a drop ink in the ocean of analysed works. The likelihood of creating anything substantially similar is near impossible ~0.00001% (Unless someone prompts for that specific style).

Warner Bros will no doubt have an easy time proving their images have been infringed (page 26), in the linked page they show side by side comparisons which can't be denied. However other factors such as market dilution and fair use may come into effect. Or they may make a settlement to work together or pay out like other companies have.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

To Recap: We know AI doesn't steal on a technical level, it is a tool that utilizes the datasets that a 3rd party has to link or add to the AI models for them to use. Sort of like saying that a car that had syphoned fuel to it, stole the fuel in the first place.. it doesn't make sense. Although not the same, it reminds me of the "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" arguments a while ago. In this case, it's not the AI that uses the datasets but a person physically adding them for it to train off.

The term "AI Steals art" misattributes the agency of the model. The model doesn't decide what data it's trained on or what it's utilized for, or whatever its trained on is ethically sound. And the fact that most models don't memorize the individual artworks, they learn statistical patterns from up to billions of images, which is more abstraction, not theft.

I somewhat dislike the generalization that people have of saying "AI steals art" or "Fuck AI", AI encompasses a lot more than generative AI, it's sort of like someone using a car to run over people and everyone repeatedly saying "Fuck engines" as a result of it.

Tell me, how does AI apparently steal again?

—————————————————————————————————————————————————

Googles (Official) response to the UK government about their copyright rules/plans, where they state that the purpose of image generation is to create new images and the fact it sometimes makes copies is a bug: HERE (Page 11)

Open AI's response to UK Government copyright plans: HERE

[BBC News] - America firms Invests 150 Billion into UK Tech Industry (including AI)

Page 165 of Hight Court Documentation Getty vs Stability

High Court Judge Joanna Smith on Stability AI's Model (Link above), to quote:

This response refers to the model itself, not the input datasets, not the outputted images, but the way in which the Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models operate.

TLDR: As noted in a hight court in England, by a high court judge. While being influenced by it for the weights during training, the model doesn't store any of the copyrighted works, the weights are not an infringing copy and do not store an infringing copy.

TLDR: NOT INFRINGING COPYRIGHT AND NOT STEALING.


r/DefendingAIArt • • Jun 08 '25

PLEASE READ FIRST - Subreddit Rules

98 Upvotes

The subreddit rules are posted below. This thread is primarily for anyone struggling to see them on the sidebar, due to factors like mobile formatting, for example. Please heed them.

Also consider reading our other stickied post explaining the significance of our sister subreddit, r/aiwars.

If you have any feedback on these rules, please consider opening a modmail and politely speaking with us directly.

Thank you, and have a good day.


1. All posts must be AI related.

2. This Sub is a space for Pro-AI activism. For debate, go to r/aiwars.

3. Follow Reddit's Content Policy.

4. No spam.

5. NSFW allowed with spoiler.

6. Posts triggering political or other debates will be locked and moved to r/aiwars.

This is a pro-AI activist Sub, so it focuses on promoting pro-AI and not on political or other controversial debates. Such posts will be locked and cross posted to r/aiwars.

7. No suggestions of violence.

8. No brigading. Censor names of private individuals and other Subs before posting.

9. Speak Pro-AI thoughts freely. You will be protected from attacks here.

10. This sub focuses on AI activism. Please post AI art to AI Art subs listed in the sidebar.

11. Account must be more than 7 days old to comment or post.

In order to cut down on spam and harassment, we have a new AutoMod rule that an account must be at least 7 days old to post or comment here.

12. No crossposting. Take a screenshot, censor sub and user info and then post.

In order to cut down on potential brigading, cross posts will be removed. Please repost by taking a screenshot of the post and censoring the sub name as well as the username and private info of any users.

13. Most important, push back. Lawfully.


r/DefendingAIArt • • 5h ago

I can't help but to laugh at this

Post image
196 Upvotes

r/DefendingAIArt • • 3h ago

AI has inadvertently created the ultimate filter for lazy clout chasers, and it's glorious!

Post image
60 Upvotes

I saw this post in a modding community today and it sparked a massive realization. OP was crying that AI assisted mods are getting double the endorsements and actually stated they feel like a moron for even trying to mod anymore simply because other people are succeeding.

This right here exposes the absolute unintended beauty of what AI tools are doing to our hobbies and creative spaces. It's actively weeding out the lazy, uninspired posers who only participate for the clout, the validation, the monopoly on attention and possible monetization. For years, these people settled for absolute mediocrity because the technical barrier to entry, and some people's lack of effort to learn or develop skills, protected them from real competition. They felt entirely entitled to your admiration and compensation simply because they spent hours doing something the hard way.

Now that AI tools allow anyone with an actual vision to bypass that tedious gatekeeping and produce high quality results, the posers are having a total meltdown. They're publicly outing themselves. They don't actually care about creating. If they loved the craft, they would just keep creating for the joy of it. What they actually loved was being part of an exclusive club where society was forced to praise their substandard work.

AI completely shattered their unearned sense of superiority. They're furious that their ideas are too weak to compete in a true meritocracy. Watching them threaten to take their ball and go home the moment the forced applause stops is the greatest unintended perk of this technological leap. True creators will keep building brilliant things. The entitled narcissists will keep crying. AI is such a beautiful invention!


r/DefendingAIArt • • 1h ago

Defending AI They’ve done nothing but be insufferable and abusive for 5+ years and are suddenly confused why less and less are listening

Post image
• Upvotes

r/DefendingAIArt • • 7h ago

Defending AI No one is allowed to create things anymore without automatically being accused

Post image
95 Upvotes

There's more comments complaining about it, but a lot are praising how good it looks.


r/DefendingAIArt • • 4h ago

Luddite Logic Holy fucking mother of cornballs

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

34 Upvotes

r/DefendingAIArt • • 10h ago

Luddite Logic Gotta go Fast!

Post image
91 Upvotes

r/DefendingAIArt • • 6h ago

Luddite Logic After crying for so long about AI "stealing art", all it took for people to suddenly accept AI was it reverse-engineering software and games so they could pirate them more easily.

42 Upvotes

Just a thought I had about the hypocrisy of AI haters after recent developments in PS5 emulation and software reverse-engineering.


r/DefendingAIArt • • 6h ago

My Goodness... (Reupload)

Post image
37 Upvotes

I don't normally post on here, but my goodness... The nerve to make fun of someone using AI for help while being unable to make a meme for themselves.

Edit: Forgot to block out the name of the subreddit. As I said, I don't post here much ^.^;


r/DefendingAIArt • • 1h ago

"I only stole assets from Street Fighter 3 and used a mod manager someone else made to put them into the Street Fighter 6 engine developed by Capcom but I didn't use evil AI to steal or use anyone else's code besides those three things I already knowingly stole and used from"

Post image
• Upvotes

I've been following this mod for a while and it's actually really cool but damn people that hate AI get such tunnel vision that they don't even understand the logistics of their own actions.


r/DefendingAIArt • • 6h ago

Luddite Logic What I've noticed about Anti-AI crowd as a whole

36 Upvotes

None of them have any history before suddenly being active at 2018, The time line Is even more bizarre matches the 2008 tsunami of weirdos making accounts that caused mods to do deep IP checks.

  • Furry/gaming spaces are the most heavily affected with them claiming to having vast archive of Art. By 2024, A lot of them end up being Art thieves of the worst kind which lines up with the 2023 Twitter meltdown.

  • They seem to have no money saving skills where everything has to funded & are quick waste away up to 4 grand a month. Some even need to use how their jobless but then shutdown any more questions how their home looks much nicer than It should be.

  • 95% of them are Nvidia fanboys who have no issues using DLSS 4.

  • Are just as unbearable In other subjects If not more so. Music quality?, Cue them pouring out how FLAC the only choice despite It costing $400+ for memory at 2TB+ M2/SSD.

  • Turn BlueSky Into a dumpster fire not caring It was mostly made/kept up by AI.

  • Ruined a lot of AA/Indie projects because of them claiming to use AI. Even If It turns out to be false streamers stop playing said game with some being hostile about It.


r/DefendingAIArt • • 1h ago

Defending AI A.I. Could help you get things done Faster so you can have More Time to Enjoy Life.

Post image
• Upvotes

Yes. This image was Purely made with A.I. I wanted to Create this with Google A.I. cause, that's it. That's how short it takes for A.I. to Create an Image Like this. I'm not much of an artist admititly. I want to enjoy my life, while also showing Off my ideas to the world. But it's way too much time and effort, and I don't have the budget to do so. With Google A.I. You can Basically create any art you want in no time, anywhere You want it to be, like a beach, or a pipe, or at school. Or anywhere. This shows just how Powerful Generative A.I. and Truly be. And I think I would rather have that, then suffering ,self into being an artist, or an animator. Cause once you have something like that Thinkamation Helmet, it will be an Absolute breeze and cake walk for you guys. Trust Me.


r/DefendingAIArt • • 1h ago

Defending AI "My favorite fictional character agrees with me!" found this on Instagram

Post image
• Upvotes

Damn. why do people still do this? Let's also not forget Soundwave from Transformers G1 is technically an AI, since he's a mechanical being who can manipulate the systems in his body, ie: transformation, his weapons and gadgets.


r/DefendingAIArt • • 1h ago

Anti-AI art rhetoric has no place in the real world

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

• Upvotes

I'm sorry but after being told to "pick up a pencil" for the millionth time, I'm going to push back hard, and so should every AI artist out there. No, we won't create art in only ways antis deem acceptable, there are many different ways to make art. Why don't antis pick up a keyboard and learn to make AI art instead of being jealous that other people make more beautiful and meaningful artworks than they'll ever be able to in their life?


r/DefendingAIArt • • 5h ago

Defending AI Ai is inevitable, deal with it.

Post image
18 Upvotes

r/DefendingAIArt • • 1h ago

AI Developments Quebec author accused of using AI gives up proving novel’s origins, publisher says

Thumbnail
cbc.ca
• Upvotes

r/DefendingAIArt • • 15m ago

The fact that I got downvoted (and OP got upvoted in their reply), just proves my point. Hardly anyone outside of Reddit/Twitter cares about your AI use.

Post image
• Upvotes

And the fact that the original post's title reads as 'You plebs and your inferior slop mods are nothing compared to my superior handmade mod!' is just the cream on top.
Anti-AI people like this are, honestly, insufferable.
Don't yuck our yum, man.


r/DefendingAIArt • • 5h ago

Defending AI They’re harassing Pokédex fillers AGAIN for his AI ART

Post image
13 Upvotes

His points don’t even make any sense, luckily there are people in the comments defending him. But this video is crazy. This isn’t right???


r/DefendingAIArt • • 6h ago

I made this with AI this morning

Post image
16 Upvotes

r/DefendingAIArt • • 4h ago

We can all make music now. Getting someone to actually listen is the hard part.

6 Upvotes

You finally make a song you’re excited about. You share it… and then wonder whether anyone got far enough to hear the bit you really wanted them to hear 😭

Sometimes you just want someone to go “that chorus though 👀” and know exactly which bit they mean.

Imagine a place full of people who understand that feeling.

Somewhere to share your songs, discover other artists, enter weekly competitions, vote for your favourites, and get slightly too invested in what other artists have been upto this week.

Imagine a space where you upload your track and leave a review for another artist, but if you forgot to review, then your post vanishes 👀

Imagine uploading your track and leaving a review, now the next guy has to leave review otherwise his post disappears ✨️✨️

Imagine ongoing seasons, monthly creative challenges, cover art competitions, and a radio stream playing everyone’s submissions. Plenty of reasons to press play on something you didn’t make—and people doing the same for yours.

Anyway, this imaginary place is getting suspiciously specific—because I've found it!

It’s AI Music Lab ✨️

A discord community focussed on sharing and engaging 💜

Come join us here: https://discord.gg/XkcJsWqfDr


r/DefendingAIArt • • 17h ago

Defending AI The panic about AI art is eerily similar to what happened when photography was invented.

74 Upvotes

If you look at history, there was a very similar panic among artists and creatives when photography was invented.

People were saying that photography couldn't be real art because it was created by a "soulless machine" without "human emotion."

People called anyone using photography "lazy," because it eliminated the years of practice needed to master a brush or pencil.

Photographers were even accused of "plagiarising" nature by simply copying it instead of interpreting it.

People thought artistic jobs would disappear because you no longer had to hire an artist to paint your portrait, illustrate your book, etc.

There were many declarations that "art is dead."

But we all know what happened. Photography became its own kind of art. Yes, any moron can snap a selfie in two seconds, but to make something great you still need skill and taste. And this quickly created vastly more jobs than what had existed before: modern journalism, factories were built to create cameras, catalogs, advertising, eventually film and television.

It was BECAUSE the cost of images was reduced to near-zero that demand skyrocketed exponentially, and there are now orders of magnitude more jobs for creatives than there were before.

I suspect AI art will do the same. Imagine game worlds that are able to be actual fully developed worlds with agentic NPCs living realistic lives and boundless content that is AI-assisted but human-crafted. Imagine youtubers able to make feature-length films with hollywood-level production values. Studios suddenly able to take risks on more interesting projects instead of being forced to pump out soulless sequels and remakes because they can't risk losing money.


r/DefendingAIArt • • 6h ago

Luddite Logic Death jokes, double standards. Classic hypocrisy.

Post image
9 Upvotes

Apparently, death threats become comedy gold when they're aimed at people you dislike. Funny how the whole “it's just a joke” defense suddenly depends on who's being targeted.

To be clear, this is aimed only at people making or defending those death-threat “““memes/jokes”””—not every anti-AI person.


r/DefendingAIArt • • 8m ago

Luddite Logic An argument between two antis, one more radical than the other

Thumbnail
gallery
• Upvotes

r/DefendingAIArt • • 1d ago

Modified my artwork with Ai , is this me stealing my own work ?

Thumbnail
gallery
244 Upvotes

People who call it theft never take things like this into account , people who modify their own artwork …. Also be honest … was my hand drawn artwork just as good ? I think so