My Views on AI Generated Content

Think of it like what happened with CGI and Digital Art: once those came onto the scene, anyone who didn’t try to learn and adapt to those got gone. Similar goes for scams, you have to change and adapt as these things occur.
It sucks, but that’s sometimes how it has to be. I know no one wants to hear this, but it’s the raw truth: new dangers come to everything, it’s just nature. You can either “hobble yourself” by trying to prevent these things from taking, mastering them, making a big enough splash in your debut…

Or you can perish.

It doesn’t feel fair, it isn’t fair, but effort has to be made if you want to be safe. Even former professionals who’ve been in the business at the big names will tell you that the entertainment business if CUTTTHROAT, even before AI was a thing (these Youtubers have confirmed multiple times on their videos that one of them has worked at Disney, and was considered for DC comics).
It’s not being mean, it’s telling you reality.

1 Like

Could the people claiming that something more must be done by moderation to preserve this site’s community clarify why something must be done? Like, provide a plausible what-if sketch of a scenario in which the site/community dies?

Because from where I’m sitting, my hunch is that 1) the currrent situation is un-ideal as far as clarity goes, but getting better 2) people are still motivated to make games, post them, and comment on them 3) some people’s feelings are hurt, maybe even so much that they leave, which I don’t like but is inevitable given that something objectively controversial (genAI) is going on.

If my hunch is correct, AICG-moderation isn’t the site-existential issue some are implying it to be. And if that’s the case, I think it would be worth pointing out. But if it is a site-killing issue, it’d help to have clarity about how so that we can fight it.

2 Likes

The worry is that the AI folks will start using this site to find targets to scrape, and sheep to fleece.
Even if it’s not directly from here, if hypothetically one of those AI bros happens to have some work that most definitively appears to take “inspiration” from one of the creators on here - even if it wasn’t actively on here, it still looks like this place is nothing but a gathering place for game so that the carnivores have easy access to prey. And that’s not even getting into the fact that AI makes scam creations very, very easy to make. Adding to that, it took A LOT of shouting before a legally compromising situation was even properlly dealt with.

What a horrible mentality. Acting like pursuing creative endeavors is like Squid Game or something. The best effort to make to be safe is getting rid of the thing that’s threatening you. That’s why people are passionate about fighting this. And it’s working. Even AAAs like Call of Duty are getting ripped apart for putting genAI assets in its campaign. The bubble’s on its way to bursting. Smarter to adapt to that by opening up MSPaint and some pixel art Youtube tutorials, or Notepad and a thesaurus. It’ll be harder than it is for traditional artists to do digital, though, cuz they have actual skills that translate pretty easily. They can just trade the pencil for a stylus. So your comparison doesn’t work either.

I won’t be speaking to you again.

5 Likes

I feel this is getting out of hand. I hate to say this @grotlover2 because generally speaking I’m all for reasoned debate and intelligent discourse but even this thread is rapidly devolving. I think this is too much of a hot button topic to allow the continuation of on the site. As others have pointed out, this is not the appropriate forum for this debate. It just leads to division and strife. And whichever side of the argument a person comes down on it’s just not worth it here. Or tell you what - here’s a compromise. New section: AI discussion. People can’t rant and rave for or against all they like in there. Otherwise it’s just a moratorium on discussion of AI outwith that section.

1 Like

Since Grot said they were unable to get many visual artist responses, I thought I would add my thoughts and observations on AI in respect to that scene, at least as someone who draws WG anime-style pinups and illustrations and has had discussions on the topic with other artists of varying levels of skill and popularity. I’m primarily a hobbyist, but I do have a fair amount of experience with the commission process on both sides. I am also approaching from the creative angle, NOT as a programmer (despite my best efforts) so do not assume anything I have to say applies very well or at all to that field.

I spent like 20 hours working on bits and pieces of this rambling mess oh god im also not a writer

I’ll say upfront I don’t support AIGC use in general for the usual concerns. But pretty much everyone reading this will have already planted their flag on those issues and I’m not gonna change their mind so I won’t go any further there, and will try to not let it colour the rest of my response too much. Instead I’ll talk mostly about the product, and as it relates to the “mono-media” of visual art rather than only a component of games.

I’ll be talking about GenAI use fairly neutrally, but I don’t want that to be any sort of endorsement. I consider anything you make yourself, regardless of quality, infinitely more valuable than the output of an AI model.
Imagine that as a large watermark over this whole post periodically.

On the consumer side, At best I consider AIGC to be filling the role of an artist who always has “free requests” in their bio. Before AI came around people would trawl sites for those two words together and then scattershot reply with their preferred character to any and all instances, regardless of if the artists main body of work was even relevant to them. And I know a couple of those individuals who happily made the jump to using GenAI as their personal “fat of she” machine once it became viable. If you’re okay with the house style and all you need to be happy is your favourite character with huge tits, belly, and ass in a pose and outfit with enough tags on danbooru to provide decent training data, knock yourself out. And people do.

Since opening the floodgates to AIGC on their platforms, searching Deviantart and Pixiv for a specific character will return results that consist of single account posting dozens upon dozens of slight variations of the same prompt’s outputs, drowning out almost every other result. And there are hundreds of those accounts, all uploading images with absolutely zero inherent value to anyone but themselves. Why should what they post be of interest to anyone else who’s also fine with that kind of content if they too can go to the AI for their own free requests that can be tailored to their specifications.

Even for accounts that post more curated generations, it’s so easy now, so many people are doing it. We’re undergoing hyperinflation (And not the kind some people here would enjoy) for generic pinup art. It’s the aisle full of Buzz Lightyears for accounts with their on-the clock daily post of a thighs-up, front-on or 3/4 view of popular gacha/anime character in some meme outfit with her cleavage pressed together, all rendered in slightly too much detail. As you start entering the niche fetish sphere a lot of those images become even more interchangeable as the number of relevant images for training data decreases and people use the same small handful of available models.

All that is annoying to navigate, and because social media algorithms prioritize regular and frequent content uploaders to bolster user engagement, the accounts using the content generator are happy to supply. While I’d prefer that it not get posted at all to clog up my feeds, that’s what curation tools and the block button on my end is for. While I’m never going to be actively hostile to anyone, It’s not worth my time interacting with those types of images when I’d rather share and encourage the works of people who are engaging with the artistic process.

Things become deeply more cynical once money becomes involved.

Art IS a luxury. It takes time and effort to develop the skills required, and to do so for something relatively niche like fetish content is almost exclusively an act of passion. Even though many artists do commissions, the vast majority (and I include myself) continue to greatly undervalue their services when it comes to commission prices, subsidizing it with that passion. In a niche community you’re far less likely to find a “whale” willing to pay what fairer rates might be, and so having some money is still better than no money.

I think among a lot of prolific commissioners and other artists they understand the merits of the effort, skill, and unique personal contributions in a work, and want to support it, even if there’s no illusions of being able to make a living off it for most. It’s why there’s the joke about artists having the communal $20 bill they pass around to commission each other with. We want to support a craft. If I hired a cabinet maker, and then found out all they did was assemble the same Ikea flatpacks I could have done myself at home, I would feel cheated.

So seeing accounts pop up that advertise their Patreons or Deviantart paid pages for AIGC should frankly be insulting to pretty much everyone. It’s always brought up how AIGC lowers barriers to entry and all that for this type of content, and I agree! It’s fast, easy, and free! It’s not worth any amount of money when you can do it yourself and get essentially the same product. If you wont spend the time learning to draw, spend an afternoon downloading Stable Diffusion and your favourite character LoRas. Treat yourself with a nice POV blowjob image set. I would BY FAR prefer somebody generate content themselves than give money to glorified parasitic middlemen to do it for them.

And finally is the biggest boogieman of them all: The scammers.

I call the community “niche”, but it’s not nearly as small as it was ten or even five years ago. Some folks have even been able to make a living of it, and if not then still decent supplemental income as a broader group of people willing to spend money has developed. Incredible art gets posted on a daily basis, and it’s no longer possible to keep track of all the active artists like it once was as the community grows, subdivides, and develops increasing fringes. Tracing and ghosting commission scams have always been a recurring danger and are now easier than ever, trying to take advantage of those who genuinely want to be supportive of community members. I’ve fallen victim to it before myself.

In those cases it is straightforward what to do when they are identified. Name and shame. If you’re confident enough to make that accusation, you must have the proof. If they traced, show the original. If they ran with the money, show receipts. It is unambiguously a good thing to make sure that others do not fall victim to a liar trying to abuse the assumption that they are putting in the same effort and passion as any other artists to cheat people out of their money. Obviously this isn’t foolproof, there have been misunderstandings, but I don’t think anyone would call this type of vigilance and standards to be overreacting or witch-hunting.

Which is what makes AIGC traces so much of a painful topic.

AIGC creates a unique image for them to copy from, and that obfuscation makes it basically impossible to be sure of a source. The only time anyone was successfully called out for tracing AIGC was because they were doing it with someone else’s publicly uploaded images. Which is baffling to me because, again, doing it yourself is fast, easy, and free.

There are a handful of artists, big and small, new and old, that I am almost certain use AIGC to trace characters and backgrounds for their images, without disclosing it, while taking money from people I imagine most of whom think they are giving it for honest and fair work.

And I bite my tongue, because being ALMOST certain, is NOT certain.

While I may not have a following comparable to some of the heavy-hitters, I do have a following, and it is a weight I have to be mindful of throwing around. Many artists I talk to express how excruciating it is to see someone that you strongly believe is tracing AIGC for their posts open commissions again, and all you can do is stay quiet. Because you want to warn people, make sure that they are actually getting their money’s worth and supporting someone deserving, but there is a chance, however slim, that person does just draw like that. And now you’ve gone and torpedoed them.

I want to make sure that our community grows. Every new artist is a unique voice to be celebrated. And the best way to do that for most of us is to not scare them off by being paranoid and trigger happy lunatics.

So holding all that in and enduring the very possible presence of deceitful members among our own community, to then see some random asshole go off arguing AI somewhere, or worse make an actual false accusation and allow folks to turn around and make the prevailing sentiment into “Those Anti-AI people are working themselves rabid over nothing”, it can feel incredibly frustrating.

Okay I have spent too long on this, I have so many more tangents, but I need to call it.

I dont have much for closing thoughts. I guess if the plan for this site is to stay the course and let people approach content on their own terms, then you NEED too put the tools into their hands to curate it. I’ve expressed my frustrations with how discourse handles those sorts of things before, and other people seem to share the sentiment. Buttons to hide/block/report threads and users from the main pages.

4 Likes

Likewise as many others, as an artist I wanted to give my own two cents here.
Personally my beliefs match Groks summery of talking to artists.

Digital media has many tools and processes that make things significantly easier. Hells, even the undo button on most drawing software could be considered a dig at most artist’s line confidence.
My opinions more fall on how the AIGC is being used. Are you using it to create a reference image? cool, that’s no difference to finding any ref on the internet. But I do have a bit more of a gripe against people who just generate something and call it a day with no creative application being applied.
And of course I do have an issue with the way the models are trained without permission.

Overall I can see AIGCs becoming a helpful tool for many digital illustrators for a wide array of applications, but I can also see how it could become an undeniably creative crutch.

1 Like

That’s what first got me into AIGC images funnily enough. Can’t draw for tuppence. But I’m interested in getting back into 3D modelling. But getting references images was always a challenge. Or I found it to be so. Right now, I’m seeing AIGC and the VN I’m working on as a learning experience/tools for development process. My longer term plan is get back into modelling and build from there.

I am curious about the comparison to using reference images you found on the internet. If we carry it a little further, do you think using genAI as content in projects is comparable to using stuff you found online?

Actually the whole comparison between genAI as a type of search/reference tool reminds me of a lawsuit google had a few years ago. They were scraping data from people’s sites and putting it in little summary boxes so no one was clicking through to the actual site that provided the information and had some economic/legal ramifications I don’t recall the specifics of at the moment.
Actually as I’m typing this I’m realizing that was literally just a simpler version of what AI search tools are now.

The great thing about being a fetish community is that we, as a whole, don’t have to give a single shit what people at the big end of town think about how ‘inevitable’ things are. You know what’s inevitable? The huge goddamn bubble bursting, bringing down businesses that overinvested in tools far less capable than they think they are. This is more like the Dotcom Bubble than anything I’ve seen since the 2000s, when everyone thought ‘The Web’ was a magical solution to everything. Then, it was ‘The Cloud’. Now, it’s ‘AI’.

The outputs of LLMs, especially in more complex tasks, is too unreliable for me, as a writer (especially as a writer that has worked WITH artists) to trust it. It is formulaic, smells ozone every few paragraphs, and its desire to adapt to what it thinks the user wants inevitably leads to repetition and stasis. It is not imaginative, it can’t think ahead. I can throw ideas at it and see how its responds, but even attempting to write with Very Large models means constantly rewriting outputs my goddamn self.

You can say ‘they’re getting better’, but if a model is being developed by a commercial entity, that’s riding out the venture capital, know that access and use of that service Can and WILL be cut off at some point; either from running out of money, running out of goodwill from investors demanding a ROI, or both. Trust me; I’m inside some of the indie spaces in LLM scenes and the amount of ‘improvements’ are slowing down. Big Tech solutions are increasingly self-censored and monitored, which is a non-starter for this community; everything you send to a commercially-run server is and has been tracking you. You are the product.

I am sure there are people on a different end of the skill curve to me, for whom it feels like an upgrade on their own writing, but if so, then maybe you should be looking for a writer for your project, or learn more about how to write better. It can do mediocre pretty reliably, but that’s due to the enormous volume of mediocre writing in its datasets. Turns out, scraping AO3 and the like does not result in literary genius. It can do ok, but it is incapable of doing good.


The above is all before we actually step back and ask what the companies investing in LLMs are actually doing with all the free data being thrown into it, or what they’re using it for. The answer is; Evil Shit. If you think the surveillance state is bad now, the more data you let these groups get, the worse it will get. I don’t worry about an ‘AI takeover’, because Big Tech are already meddling in politics and shit way before any kind of supposed ‘singularity’ happens. The best strategy we, as a fetish community, can have is to steer clear of any form of commercialised LLM or other 'AI tool. We know that it’s getting enshittified already. We don’t have to sit on our hands and wait for people to get burnt by spiralling prices and sunken costs.

On top of all that, they’re also the ones causing the most environmental and economic damage in terms of hoarding resources, be it RAM modules, electricity, or water. Again, this is unsustainable, especially as supplies of both are finite and needed by Actual People; once people start getting impacted worse, there WILL be a backlash that will lead to a collapse of datacentre construction.

If people want to mess around as a hobby, or for non-commercial purposes, I can look the other way. There are ways to engage with LLMs that don’t cause widespread harm. I can’t stick to a ‘piracy’ argument against them (whomst among us hasn’t pirated anything, ever?), but I can vehemently state that actively discouraging the use of the most transparently-harmful and unsustainable forms of ‘AI’ isn’t just about minimising harm in the world, but also limiting the long-term damage to this very community. Don’t buy into the latest hype train. Don’t help corporations that actively hate anything un-marketable. There’s a direct connection between the prudes trying to shut the stuff we do down, and the companies pushing all these ‘AI’ solutions, enough for it to be considered self-harm.


What people should be doing is everything they can to be on the other side of the ‘mediocrity curve’ that’s being created; if you can create in ways that it cannot, you will be in-demand, no matter what. That also means that we, as a community, should also be looking to help and support creators and people that haven’t got there yet.

Support ok artists. Help average writers. There’s nothing worse than feeling like you can never do better than a machine, even if that’s patently untrue.

Creators won’t be able to make that transition from mediocre to good if we encourage beginners to essentially ‘cheat’ themselves out of a lasting career.

17 Likes

Only other thing I kinda want to say now is that the MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE in this whole situation, is the Bad Actor Problem. I think that if there are better, clearer, more stringent rules applied to commercial games (is paywalled in any meaningful way) that set out the level of transparency required to have a presence on the forum.

I’ve already made my case that commercial LLMs should also be banned from any forum-sponsored competition or event, but the issue of perceived Bad Actors is the one that’s spread the most distrust. There’s simply been nowhere near enough understanding about what a responsible commercial developer looks like, nor enough grace being given by non-devs for how goddamn hard it is to make good games, especially if limited to a part-time hobby.

I don’t think we can stop slop existing, since it’ll be uploaded to itch regardless of what policies we have, but we can at least discourage it internally and give people here at least a sliver more confidence that commercial projects meeting whatever Basic Standards we proscribe will continue to adhere to them. Exposure and reputation are the main leverages we have against slop and we need to use it, AI or not.

Reward good devs, punish bad devs, educate new devs.

10 Likes

As someone who:

  • Hasn’t published or contributed to a game here yet (but is working on one)
  • Has previously enjoyed a few games that use AIGC
  • Has tried generating a small image “mod” pack for another game
  • And has nevertheless grown increasingly disenchanted with AIGC

I would be happy with a ban on commercial games with AIGC. If we end up with a total AIGC ban, that’s fine too, although I suspect we’d have to pass through some months of folks trying to hide their AI usage (or even false positive accusations)

6 Likes

Just Make sure all the AI stuff is labeled so i can avoid it.

8 Likes

I believe I already pointed that out here, but we’re in a constant loop:

I’m not one to proclaim that the end times are upon us, but my fear is that if we continue down this road that this site will suffer a slow and prolonged death. Estimated timescale? No idea, probably several years, but we’re far from being locked into this fate. It seems silly to resign ourselves to what is happening currently when there are several alternatives that could be explored.

Maybe stricter moderation is the answer (although I heavily doubt it), maybe drawing a line against GenAI discussion will quell the flames, or maybe it’s something else entirely. The point is we’re certainly not on the best path forwards at the moment.

Perhaps when the main site gets launched in the future there’ll be more flexibility for the admin team to curate the content that gets uploaded, but until that time comes there’s no point in allowing the fracturing between users (which we’ve seen in this very thread) to continue. If the community is divided and fractured, who’s there to use the main site when it is completed?

3 Likes

As you say, the difference for me is if it is reference or content. The difference between using GenAI in projects vs finding stuff online is ultimately the same.
All art comes from a reference or an inspiration. As such I don’t see any problem between that inspiration or reference from any tool or website.

When it comes to content though, If someone just plucked another artists work online without permission to use on their project, that’s obviously wrong, just like AI is being trained on art without consent by the artist. That’s something as Grot mentioned, requires more involvement from our countries respective law.

I suppose an example I could give in my own experience is this: I’d love to have a tool that allows me to see different positions a hand could make and from different angles. Either GenAI or a different art tool could help me here. But if I just took the Gen AI output or snapshotted the tool and pasted it into my art, suddenly there’s a problem. There’s a lack of creative process and learning, and it becomes a crutch.

I hope I make sense haha.

Awesome — I’m really glad to see everyone here facing this new issue with a rational attitude. Talking about problems openly and calmly is how we all grow together.

My stance on AI tools hasn’t changed: as long as the creator (or user) clearly labels their work, then it’s up to the players to decide whether they want to engage with it or not.

That’s all from me. Wishing everyone a smooth life and happy creating. Thanks!

4 Likes

Ok, this is going to be crazy. I am going to try to address some of the more common and interesting arguments I have seen. If I miss addressing anyone’s specific concern I apologize in advance. I will be skipping over those who think that I should just pick a side, but as I explained last night its because there are some big changes that will be coming down the line that I will be talking about in the 5th post, and what I decided may make more sense with that context so I just ask for everyone with that opinion to hold judgement until the 5th post is out.

Also, I am currently working on the 4th post that will go up next Monday so if I have time I may try one more response in here if there is more discussion after this but will really depend how far along I am with that post.

Ok so lets kick it off here!

I want to say I personally really like this argument and I really urge anyone interested to read @Chubberdy full argument because I think its quite good! I have one issue with it though and that is your premise.

I do want to be clear, I think your argument and conclusion is really good, but (and I could be misunderstanding you here so if I am feel free to correct me) I don’t think we as individuals have as much influence over the matter as you seem to assert. My reasoning for this is the companies developing these modes make most of their money through investment and B2B sales which we have relatively little control over.

I am actually a good example of this. I hate using LLMs to code. I feel they don’t do a good job and only make my job harder, but the VP of the company I work for told me in no uncertain terms that I have two choices:

  1. Use the LLM to do your work
  2. Get ready to find a new job

I am the only source of income for my family, needing to support both myself and my wife and I have rent that needs to get paid. And lets not even get into the fact that I would have to shutdown the site since I wouldn’t be able to afford to keep it running while also trying to live off of my savings. So what am I to do? The only practical option for me is to bow my head and reluctantly say “yes sir” just to keep from loosing my job. Its sad, but its the reality atm especially for a lot of people in software.

I am not saying the situation is hopeless though. If you want to reach your stated goal I think legislation is the only practical way we could effectively stop these bad standards before they do become standard atm; so it would be a better use of our energies and effort to attempt to force our representatives to do something about it instead of trying to take it upon ourselves.

I am going to go into a bit more detail about it in the 5th post so if you are interested in hearing more about it and even offering some suggestions keep an eye out for that when I drop that post on 12/1.

First I want to thank you @RadicalSquidward for taking the time to write that all up! I know it was a ton of work to do and I really appreciate the view point you gave in it.

I am going a bit off topic here as I want to chat about this as I have some strong opinions about the commission market in general. I really agree with what you said there, I see it with the few art friends I have, I see it with my Wife, and I really hate to see how it feels like the commission market is just a race to the bottom in terms of price. Its very odd to me personally since art, especially commissioned art (and even more so in niche communities like ours) should be treated as an artisan market, but commissions are priced as if its any standard consumer good.

I dont always have the most money to throw around but I know personally when I get the chance to commission an artist I always try to tip them to either the max I can afford or what I feel is fair for their work because they are usually so undervalued.

I could rant about this for hours but I need to be careful not to go to far off task. Before AIGC the original intention I had for the asset store was to provide artists something that maybe could help with how commission market tends to treat most artists.

Depending on how some people interpreted my arguments this may sound hypocritical, but I am 100% with you on this. It irritates me to no end when I see that myself for many of the same reasons you said, but it makes me even more irritated also due to the fact that as far as the US copyright office is concerned that is all creative commons content. I classify it almost along the same lines of if some one took an open source project and then started selling it (which happens a lot unfortunately).

I know this may sound contradictory to what I have already stated above but when it comes to monomedia projects or multimedia projects that are fully generated by AI I am in 100% agreement.

These are fair points, its more of an issue of people not using the tagging system though. As @LupusGamer pointed out Regulars (TL3) are able to adjust tags on topics as they see fit, also people can flag posts to let us know when something is misstagged and we miss it but this happens very rarely.

I think its mainly because tags are not really obvious to most users so tends to be an afterthought. We could try to do a post to try to bring more attention to it but most of the time those posts don’t tend to get a lot of views so most people dont see it. Entries on the wiki tend to be well tagged though but they are very front and center and kind of required.

That being said we can make some tags required in order to post so it could be a good idea to force at least selecting an ai or no-ai tag on projects. I actually think I intended to do that but tbh I think I pulled a stupid and just spaced it.

RESPONSES CONTINUED IN THE NEXT POST

11 Likes

You may want to have a policy in place for the inevitable point where someone uses genAI assets ripped directly from an existing weight-gaming game in their own posted game, FYI. Because that day is coming eventually, and there’s no legal recourse (or DMCA violation) as it’s not copyrightable content - but that event is certain to cause its own firestorm, especially if the ripped game is being sold for cash elsewhere. Get ahead of whether you allow these potential “clone” games to exist anywhere you control, or (like with Story of Rose) you’ll be stuck trying to figure it out in the moment while people scream about the whole thing.

2 Likes

I have seen this come up as a point quite often, mainly calls of increased curation for a variety of reasons with a common one to head off bad actors before they can act. Before I get to far into it I am planning a fairly large rework to the forums which will result in increased curation which I do hope will help with this a bit. I wont be getting into the details of it until the 5th post though.

But I have seen that it seems general concerns more over content curation tends to also be a significant factor for a lot of people. End of the day one of the reasons this has been so difficult is:

  1. We don’t tend to get reports for fraudulent stuff very often (that I at least know of). For many incidents I personalty only just learned about it when some one went off about it in public and this can be hard for me to identify sometimes as the accusations can be overshadowed by us just trying to keep order. This is why I try to encourage users to reach out directly to me so we can begin looking into it.
  2. Before AIGC we have had a few attempts of users trying to report devs as scammers mainly due to off site drama. This means we have to really do our research to ensure some one is not just making the claim because they don’t like a dev. This can make us feel really slow to react since it can be hard for us to track down info, and the few reports I have received are usually very light on any hard evidence and are more speculation or 3rd party accounts.
  3. Since Forums are naturally for discussion we don’t have a lot of tooling that makes it easy for us to curate content. I can not deny though that while I may still see the forums mainly for discussion, practically speaking I think more people use it like itch or a gallery site. But this miss match of intended and actual use makes it really hard for Krod and I to keep an eye on things.
  4. We have a really hard time verifying paywalled content in general. Since we just cant get access to some one’s Patreon we routinely have to take their word for things and depend on users that are in it to work with us to verify assuming we know any we can ask in the first place. This becomes a non-issue if we where able to host the content as we would have direct access to it as needed.
  5. It is a slippery slope when we start curating content as we are forced to take more legal responsibility for the content being posted. This means that we might have to be more strict on what is or is not allowed which depending on your view point could be a good or a bad thing.

This is just meant to be a bit of an overview as to why its been a pain for us to really curate content. Like I said though we are planning some big changes that will also include better content curation so I hope that will be able to help anyone who may have that concern.

We actually do. I think it was announced in a news post a while back but basically we said that unless a case has ruled it fair use we will honor any DMCA requests where the person in question can provide us reasonable proof that their content was used in training. This is kind of an extreme option though as filing a DMCA request also means you are certain enough that you are willing to go to court over it.

Currently only writing has been ruled fair use so is the only one off the table.

That being said the changes we have planned that I will be going over in the 5th post will likely make that mute to a fair extent.

4 Likes

I don’t mean that - I mean that currently AI-generated content cannot be copyrighted and so a game like Big Aspirations (which by its own admission uses genAI visuals) could have somebody rip all the pictures out and put them in their own game wholesale. And it’d be perfectly legal, because the creator of the source game doesn’t own the copyrights to those images.

That would be a shitshow, especially since Big Aspirations is now monetized, so you need to make sure to have some guideline in place as to whether that’s possible. Otherwise somebody’s going to abuse the loophole that you can’t DMCA genAI-produced content to steal it and remarket it for their own gain. Regardless of what changes you have in mind, that’s going to cause a blowup if it’s simply allowed to proceed without a plan in place for handling it.

2 Likes