I shared some views with Osmond Chia of The Straits Times on the ChatGPT-enabled Ghibli-fication of images that has taken social media by storm: https://www.straitstimes.com/tech/will-users-organisations-be-in-trouble-for-posting-ghibli-style-ai-pictures.

"While non-commercial ChatGPT users may not be at risk of copyright infringement, those who upload their pictures freely onto the AI platform expose themselves to other risks.

Lawyer Khelvin Xu, a director of Covenant Chambers who handles tech disputes, said that when users upload their pictures onto ChatGPT, they are providing OpenAI with their personal data for them to use according to their own terms – and in potentially unexpected ways. For example, someone might see a new image that was made using photos uploaded by a user who didn’t expect or want their photos to be used that way."

--

Warning: the views expressed below may offend.

There were a couple of other reasons why I didn't jump on the bandwagon and order ChatGPT to Ghibli-fy a family photo to post on my socials.¹

Primarily, I felt conflicted.

As far as I can tell - and I'm happy to stand corrected - ChatGPT was trained on a dataset which included Studio Ghibli's works. But I don't know if OpenAI obtained consent from or paid Studio Ghibli.

And if it did not, then in simple terms, OpenAI would have appropriated² Studio Ghibli's creative output.

So if I use ChatGPT to create Ghibli-fied content, which could not have been created without such appropriation...

...am I complicit in acts of appropriation, carried out without consent or compensation, and in furtherance of OpenAI's own agenda?

--

My discomfort is further exacerbated by Hayao Miyazaki's thoughts on AI-generated animation.³

I don't really feel like getting into a debate on Authorial Intent,⁴ but I suggest that it's a question of respect.

Because if you appreciate the works of a particular creator, you would presumably:
- respect the said creator;
- take their point of view into account; and
- think twice before creating a facsimile of their artwork in a manner that they have expressed disapproval of.

I'm not saying that we owe creators a legal obligation to only interact with their art in a manner that they see fit. I mean, within the boundaries of the law, you do you, and it's not like anyone is going to call the police on you.

And if you love the art but hate the creator, I guess there'd be less cognitive dissonance if you go wild with your re-interpretations. After all, you might not particularly care about showing respect to such a creator.

But if you do appreciate both the artwork and the creator, then I suggest that using the artwork in a manner that goes against the creator's ethos is disrespectful of the creator.

And I wonder how many of us who created and posted Ghibli-fied images had given any thought to whether doing so was respectful to Studio Ghibli, Miyazaki, and his collaborators.

And whether our tributes turned out to be transgressions.