When AI mimics art
Chyung Eun-ju
In the last month, a curious but controversial trend took over social media. A ChatGPT image generating tool was introduced and hundreds of users did not hesitate to flock over to the artificial intelligence (AI) platform to test it out. Suddenly we found ourselves surrounded by animated images replicating the beloved artistic style of Studio Ghibli. A viral trend was born.
As quickly as this trend began, so did the debate around the ethics of mimicking artists without their consent. While some argued that the use of AI image generators to create works in the style of an artist was a form of admiration and appreciation for that particular art style, others believed it crossed a serious ethical line, disregarding the integrity of the original creators.
Is using AI models to replicate an artist's style a harmless form of appreciation or outright theft of the artist's intellectual property?
Joel Cho
From a legal perspective, the concept of style itself is notoriously difficult to protect, as copyright typically safeguards specific works, not the look and feel of an artist's unique style. Given that the idea of style is highly subjective, acquiring protection for exclusive use is anything but straightforward. A lot of people may simply be inspired by a particular artist, alleging that imitation is the greatest form of flattery, but when an AI model can generate hundreds of artworks that closely resemble an artist's signature style, like in the case of the viral trend that imitates the unique style of Studio Ghibli's founder Hayao Miyazaki, and those images start circulating on every social media platform out there, it begins to feel like something more than flattery.
Artists spend years refining their visual language, perfecting a style that becomes uniquely theirs. For a machine to replicate such style instantly and at a massive scale, without any say of the original artist and without so much as credit, consent or compensation, it seems natural to question if we are becoming desensitized to what amounts to plagiarism.
Another question that has gained attention with this trend is how AI models were able to generate images that are so good at replicating certain artist's work. AI tools must be trained using information and data made available to them, so are all the companies behind these AI image generating tools using copyrighted works legally? Is there any sort of permission that was given to use these copyrighted works to train these AI models, a license agreement with the artist?
OpenAI and other developers have taken steps to limit harmful uses, but style mimicry still remains a gray zone. Part of the challenge lies in the fact that these AI models are often trained on publicly available artwork — some of which may have been scraped without clear permission. And because the output is “new,” it often becomes difficult to clearly determine the legality of it, especially since we are still beginning to build precedents on the matter.
This trend forces us to confront an overdue conversation about how we value creative labor in a world that's quickly incorporating AI technology in our daily lives. Should artists be able to opt out of training datasets? Should AI tools disclose when they are mimicking a known style? And do we, as users, have a responsibility to pause and think before generating “AI art” that borrows from someone else’s unique aesthetic?
With the growing "Ghiblification" trend, footage of Miyazaki reacting to an AI demo in 2016 has resurfaced on social media platforms. Miyazaki is shown reacting in disgust over a demonstration of a tool that animates a humanoid figure for potential use in zombie gaming, leading him to assert that he would never incorporate such technology into his work. For someone like Miyazaki, who has openly criticized AI as a technology that would be “an insult to life itself,” this mass reproduction of artistic style may feel like an affront to the very essence of artistic integrity.
Miyazaki’s stance is emblematic of a larger concern shared by many artists and creators: the fear that AI could undermine the authenticity and soul of art. For artists like Miyazaki, animation is deeply tied to human emotion, vision and craftsmanship, which are values that an algorithm, no matter how sophisticated, can’t replicate.
The reality, however, is that these AI-powered tools are here, and they’re not going away. But how we choose to use them — and how we choose to respect the humans whose work inspired them — will define whether AI becomes a true partner in creativity or just another tool that cuts corners and creators alike.
Chyung Eun-ju (ejchyung@snu.ac.kr) is a tech research associate at Donghyun ASP. She earned both her bachelor's in business and master's in marketing from Seoul National University. Joel Cho (joelywcho@gmail.com) is a practicing lawyer specializing in IP and digital law.