New blog post "License update: AI derivation prohibited on all my art, lore, stories, and comics."
→ https://www.davidrevoy.com/article1178/license-update-ai-derivation-prohibited-on-all-my-art-lore-stories-and-comics
0 Boosts
0 Likes
@Linebyline To my surprise, the ones who are sending me this, often think they are "helping", a bit like when someone show the usage of fire to cavemen. Same type of energy, they think I'm not smart as them to know how to use AI, so they offer their help... 😩
@davidrevoy
I was looking into this licence the other day. The "Filthy Human Hands" license.
Its not that anyone would care or respect licesnes anyway... But maybe this one can be useful somehow.
At the very least I appreciate the sentiment on that one.
@davidrevoy
Il serait peut-être temps de créer une nouvelle licence type CC ou Art libre contre l'utilisation et modification par IA.
De même pour les licences logicielles d'ailleurs 🤔
@davidrevoy why would someone do that omg and sending it to you? Wtf
@davidrevoy
It's genuinely awful you have to deal with this, especially on such a regular basis. I think derivation is still fairly legally gray, though perhaps less so on directly feeding an agent a specific image to alter. It'd be interesting if the strongest point of violation is courts generally ruling AI output is not copyrightable, meaning it cannot follow the terms of being licensed as CC-BY-SA.
I'm sure malicious folks will still go against your whims, but publicly disavowing the use of generative AI will surely curb well intentioned folks, who are perhaps misinformed on the harms of generative AI usage. At the very least, I hope it gives you less headaches in your inbox; I'd feel so deflated seeing that so often.
@davidrevoy Good idea. I'm tired of orgs that puport to care about the commons being so pro-AI. My thought was to take the existing CC text verbatim, and prefix it with a "as long as you don't AI, the following applies…". I'm not a lawyer, I don't know if that would even be valid, but at least it would be something.
@davidrevoy oh my good lord if someone sent me an AI derivation of my music I will turn into a werecat and visit their house at night
@robinsyl I honestly felt mad about it the first times, before it became regular.
I sort of got used to it. During a recent holiday with my wife, she saw how my notifications were full of that, and it kept incoming; she is the one who told me it wasn't normal and I had to show that in a article.
@davidrevoy I am surprised there are not more organized initiatives to curtail theft on content (fostered) by AI companies. Even open source SW seem to be lagging behind while they used to be rather good at this.
@davidrevoy CreativeCommons statement on the opt-out of "text and data mining" (TDM) for the training purposes https://creativecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/CC-Statement-on-the-TDM-Exception-Art-4-DSM-Final.pdf and here is the implementaion of the "technical means" they refers to: https://www.w3.org/community/reports/tdmrep/CG-FINAL-tdmrep-20240510/
Interior monologue of the AI:
Ah, I see. A girl! It should be drawn in a beautiful way. Here's some fantastic volume for her magical hair 🪄
What's that? It cries? No excuse for an ugly chin! Also, it doesn't really cry, does it? Can I get a little idea of a smile? Perfect.
And what's that on the top of her head? A very strange hat, indeed. The artist can't even draw wrinkly wizard hats! Here ist the most perfect wrinkly wizard hat imaginable for this cute littly girl.
Ok, I don't exactly know, what's that down there – maybe a ball of some kind? Yeah, it's a child, why not! And really a checker board pattern fits this whole aesthetic far better than whatever that is in the base sketch.
All in all, I made it perfect. As everything should be. 😁
Why do I waste my time anthropomorphising it?
I like your attempt and your point very much. You dislike and prohibit AI without demonizing it or being unrealistic fanatic nor extreme.
I am not sure if it is possible to limit the cc-licenses in such a way, but of course one can always write an own license.
And if creative commons does not come along with a "no AI" variant, maybe "Art libre" does or GFDL (well unlikely, but you get the point, there are other free licenses)
You know the differences between the two are very subtly different emotionally.
The alteration of the context..
@davidrevoy Have you looked into using Nightshade or Glaze or something in that direction to poison AI derivation attempts?
@skaphle Yes, and I'll do the short version: it is a AI bro scam, boosted by a large (and successful) marketing effort. It was defeated on day 1, and now remain with a user base like a cult, especially appreciated from non technical user who are ready to believe it.
That's sad, I wish something like that would work, be open-source, would run on Linux, and be done by serious peoples.
@davidrevoy @skaphle I didn't know that they didn't work. Ugh. So much for Cara's artist socmed website being all into Glaze.
@Verati404 @skaphle Oh yes, Cara and in august three full AI scrapping of their database of 12 Millions of artworks... Just another proof the protection and ambition of this social media were also not up to the challenge: https://www.forbes.com/sites/robsalkowitz/2026/08/23/artists-built-a-site-to-escape-ai-scrapers-are-coming-for-it-anyway/
@davidrevoy Oh no, I didn't know that... Too bad.
@davidrevoy Are you saying that replacing a broken plate with a loaf of bread(?) isn't enough to make the AI slop original?
@davidrevoy
As someone who's trying to build a new music platform centered around CC licenses and local communities, I thank you for writing the article. I 100% concur.
My research shows that unfortunately, it's difficult for any license at all to restrict AI training on content, because that's a copyright issue, not a licensing one. I'm hoping that this will change. I want to protect local and independent musicians from AI theft, but I want them to share w/CC and be supported, too. It's hard.
@davidrevoy Why would someone look at a bunch of comics about how much you hate AI and think that sending you AI clones of those comics was a good idea?
My guess: They don't think you'll like it, they think you're owned. See? This AI you hate so much can make comics as well as you can! (It can't.)
The other "offers" of course probably had AI do the work of deciding to e-mail you and everything, so whatever humans were involved probably neither knew nor cared. Spam casts a wide net after all.