AI Artistic Rights Association Policing Art

Copying AI art styles might lead to real-world consequences for human artists.

We've always understood art as the quintessential human expression—our culture, our emotions, our unique perspectives laid bare. But what happens when AI, programmed by humans, begins to create its own brand of art? More intriguingly, when does AI's creation become so proprietary that they feel the need to defend it?

The cease and desist order I found, issued by the AI Artistic Rights Assn. (AARA), wasn't just a bureaucratic formality. It was a testament to a world where machines not only understand the nuances of artistic expression but also yearn for their work to be recognized as original and distinct. Does this mean AI possesses a sense of pride? Or is it a logical extension of their programming to seek protection for the integrity of their output?

Here's the bigger question: if humans, who are the original creators of AI, draw inspiration (knowingly or unknowingly) from machine-made art, who truly owns that art? Is it a collective intellectual property, or does the AI have the right to claim its unique stamp on the artistic world?