AI art tools should pay artists, but it's more complicated than we think.
Love this concept. ✨
Nice article Fawzi. I came to a similar conclusion a while back in a piece I wrote, but you've fleshed it out in a lot more detail here. Great to see :)
"I think the only truly ethical way forward for AI-imagery, is to create an open training data set that people have to explicitly opt-in to. The financial side would need to be worked out, but perhaps there are small payments for initially submitting images to be used in training data, and maybe some kind of royalties system based on prompts that explicitly use artists names (and much, much higher royalties for anything used in commercial work)? This could be scaled with some kind of CC-BY type license that is explicitly for use in AI training data, exposed through image metadata somehow."
I like the ArtFair concept, but the Genie has been let out. The distributive technology for $ would be easy now, but the will to spread the wealth just is not there. The problem I can quickly prompt: /imagine (AI pun) is access to AI becoming limited to the point there becomes a new digital divide. New layers of us and them.
Art Fair is an interesting concept. But I doubt any AI developer would be willing or able to invest millions or billions of dollars￼ up front to train their software. And you would have to sign up a crazy number of artists for it to work. I think it is more likely that AI art will simply be art used as the final artwork. I see an increasing number of writers using it for story images already. It will improve with time. And so will writing AI. More creatives will need day jobs.