Imagine someone was working on a project that was very important to them. Maybe it was something for work that they were getting paid for, or maybe it was just for fun. Now imagine someone took little pieces of their project and combined them with pieces of other peoples’ projects to create something new. How would they feel? This is a very real scenario for artists who post their work online right now. AI has become increasingly prevalent around the world in recent years. In my opinion, AI art is bad for several reasons, including how it is made, artists’ opinions on it, how it obscures the definition of art, and more of the general issues with this art.

AI art is typically defined as art that a machine has generated with a learning process. In the article “What is AI Art? How Artists Use AI, and How To Generate Your Own,” written by Lauren Duplessis for domestika.org, it says that AI art and AI, in general, involve machine learning. It relies on an algorithm that has a databank, and a model that makes or does something with the data. In the case of AI art, the AI collects images online and transforms them into something else. What the AI makes depends on what the user puts into the prompt. To make these AI images, it is common for people to use random images they find online. The issue with this is that they don’t have permission from the owner of the image. As I see it, it’s a problem when someone takes something and uses it without the creator’s permission; I would hate it if my art was used like that. Just because someone puts something out for others to see, doesn’t mean that viewers have the right to use it. This opinion causes a lot of disputes because some people say that artists’ posting their works publicly means that people can use them.

Due to this, people are very divided on AI art: some are all for it, some are against it, and most have a more neutral stance on it. There are a lot of reasons why AI art is liked — some claim that it makes art more accessible for those who may not have the opportunities or skills to make their own art. All people have to do is enter a few words into a generator, and it makes something for them; it’s much easier than actually putting time and effort into something. In addition, “The Ethical Pros and Cons of AI Art,” written by Electra Nanou for MakeUseOf, says that there are many pros and cons to using AI art. Some of the pros are that people don’t have to pay for it and that anyone can make it. The cons are listed for more ethical reasons. AI generators learn from artists’ work without permission, resulting in artists not receiving money for their work and losing revenue. I find issues with the pros, especially the one that states that

AI art allows everyone to make art; I believe everyone can make art, even if it’s not good. I also don’t agree when they said that a pro was people not having to pay for art — people pay for the service of having art made for them. People also pay to have other things made for them, like jewelry. Why should art be any different? Why shouldn’t artists get paid for the work they do?

These questions lead to one of the main debates about AI art, which is, “Is it actually art?” The definition of art is subjective and can mean different things to different people. According to the Oxford Dictionary, art is defined as “the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.” Most would describe it as someone creating something to express themselves or their imagination. An article by Ahmed Elgammal, who is the founder and director of the Art and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at Rutgers University, states that creating art is not just about the outcome, but the process. Art is directly related to human creativity. How creative is it if people are just entering words and generating images? How can people find pride in something if they didn’t put time and effort into making it? How is typing words into a generator expressing imagination? It depends on how people define art. I would say that because art is tied to human expression, AI art shouldn’t be classified as art.

Besides the dispute about the definition of AI art, there are a lot of concerning issues with it. The article written by Simona Tolcheva for MakeUseOf, lists four different reasons why there might be some problems with AI art. One of these issues is the fine print. One of the most used AI generators lists in their terms and conditions that they have the right to change or sell licenses to the user’s image. Furthermore, another big issue with AI art is copyright; it’s a bit of a gray area because more than one person created it — the person or people whose art was fed into the generator and the person who generated it. Besides this, there are also some ethical problems with AI art, such as determining if it’s technically theft or not. This is because most artists do not permit their art to be fed to the AI. 

AI art has a lot of issues, and in my opinion, they outweigh the good. AI art is made in a problematic way, with many stealing artists’ works. People also have varied opinions on whether or not it is ethical. AI art blurs the definition of art and presents very real and important issues for artists. Online artists are in a very stressful situation right now, having to worry about AI stealing their work. People need to put themselves in others’ shoes more often and think about how they would feel; I imagine most would have a problem if someone did this to their work. In conclusion, I believe AI art is ethically wrong due to the effects it has on artists.