Multitudes Urge Christie's to Terminate AI Art Auction following Authored Petition
The online petition took off on Saturday, sparked by Christie's announcement of their upcoming AI-focused auction. The sale, with its projected earnings surpassing $600,000, showcases artists like Refik Anadol, Harold Cohen, Holly Herndon, Mat Dryhurst, Alexander Reben, and Claire Silver, among others. The auction consists of more than 20 lots, spanning five decades, with a fourth being digitally native works such as non-fungible tokens (NFTs).
The petition, currently holding 3,936 signatures, primarily criticizes the AI models used to generate some pieces in the sale, stated to have been trained on copyrighted works without the creators' consent.
The letter accuses the AI models and the companies behind them of exploiting artists by using their work unwillingly and without compensation to construct commercial AI products competing with the artists. Companies like those responsible for Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, and Dall-E have been caught up in lawsuits over this issue. Artists argue their work has been utilized by AI programs without their consent or payment for permission.
The technology companies argue in self-defense, using the fair-use clause, which allows the use of copyrighted material without permission in certain circumstances.
Ed Newton-Rex, Chief Executive of Fairly Trained, a non-profit that certifies generative AI companies for fairer data sourcing, expressed concern over the situation, writing on X.
The letter is directed towards Christie's digital art specialists, Nicole Sales Giles and Sebastian Sanchez, who lead the auction. In a statement to The Art Newspaper, Christie's responded, asserting that the artists in the sale have substantial, multidisciplinary art practices, and that many of the works are just enhancing their human creators' bodies of work.
Sarp Kerem Yavuz, an artist whose practice occasionally involves AI, and whose work is included in the Christie's sale, states that the claim of AI-generated art as theft is due to a misinterpretation of the data sets used in AI-generated art.
The increasing integration of AI technology into daily life is causing laws regarding copyright and fair use to strain. In January, the US Copyright Office decided that artists could copyright work produced using AI tools but clarified that "purely AI-generated material" remains ineligible for copyright protections.
Copyright protection for AI art depends on human expression through AI systems and continuing to enjoy protection if human contributions meet the criteria for authorship, and these elements are assessed on a case-by-case basis. Training AI models using copyrighted material without explicit consent raises significant copyright infringement concerns, with unauthorized training resulting in lawsuits. While Christie's defends its position by arguing authenticated use of artist inputs, the debate underscores the need for clearer regulations governing AI training processes to address these ethics and legal issues.
The petition also calls for stricter regulations in the arts sector to prevent the misuse of artists' styles and intellectual property in AI-generated works. The discussion around AI-generated art and its relationship with copyright law is also acontentious issue in the global arts community, with many advocating for a balance between innovation and respect for artists' rights.
