itch.io store now requires AI generated content disclosures for assets

Something puzzles me.

...because some time ago, when I expressed my concerns about the extensive and almost exclusive use of game engines like Unity and Unreal, the most frequent response was that it was fine because it allowed anyone, even those who didn’t know how to program, to develop games.
The engine takes care of the programming to a certain extent, you add the graphics and audio, and everyone is happy.

Now, the extensive use of AI for image generation seems to be perceived differently, but the principle remains the same: you handle the programming and audio while paying relatively little attention to the graphical aspect, yet... not everyone is happy.


Last edited by kokoko3k on 21 November 2024 at 3:02 pm UTC

Quoting: kokoko3kSomething puzzles me.

I ask because some time ago, when I expressed my concerns about the extensive and almost exclusive use of game engines like Unity and Unreal, the most frequent response was that it was fine because it allowed anyone, even those who didn’t know how to program, to develop games.
The engine takes care of the programming to a certain extent, you add the graphics and audio, and everyone is happy.

Now, the extensive use of AI for image generation seems to be perceived differently, but the principle remains the same: you handle the programming and audio while paying relatively little attention to the graphical aspect, yet... not everyone is happy.

Because the code that you use was written by the company that you licensed the engine from. With AI it is usually unclear what it's from and who is the rightful owner to the source material. Stores are simply attempting to cover their responsibility.

Quoting: kokoko3kThe engine takes care of the programming to a certain extent, you add the graphics and audio, and everyone is happy.

Now, the extensive use of AI for image generation seems to be perceived differently, but the principle remains the same: you handle the programming and audio while paying relatively little attention to the graphical aspect, yet... not everyone is happy.

Engines can be reused depending on their license, or the developer's goodwill in the case of mods. People pay attention to the engine licensing terms because they expect they will have to obey them, hence the reaction to the Unity runtime fee.

The current GenAI trend is driven by datasets of every picture ever made, ingested without the artists consent.
The proponents of the bubble do not expect to obey artists' rights such as copyright. So I am glad itch is requiring disclosures, it's a good first step against both slop and copyright laundering.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/ai-spits-out-exact-copies-of-training-images-real-people-logos-researchers-find/
https://www.salon.com/2024/01/09/impossible-openai-admits-chatgpt-cant-exist-without-pinching-copyrighted-work/

Quoting: EhvisBecause the code that you use was written by the company that you licensed the engine from. With AI it is usually unclear what it's from and who is the rightful owner to the source material. Stores are simply attempting to cover their responsibility.

That covers the stores, not people pointing their fingers on this but not that.

Quoting: kokoko3k

Quoting: EhvisBecause the code that you use was written by the company that you licensed the engine from. With AI it is usually unclear what it's from and who is the rightful owner to the source material. Stores are simply attempting to cover their responsibility.

That covers the stores, not people pointing their fingers on this but not that.

I would think it obvious that the potential legal issue also points to an ethical issue, that people might perhaps care about if they, you know, care about ethics. Also, there's an aesthetic issue--people often think AI assets will tend to be bland and crappy, and extensive use of them suggests a developer without aesthetic standards or a vision of their own.

More broadly, some people worry about a kind of economic/ecological impact of widespread AI use. If everyone's using AI for written and/or artistic content, there are two potential impacts: One, nobody will be paying writers or artists and they will all lose their livelihoods. Two, because AI depends on original human writing and art as its source material and seems to get iteratively crappier if it is drawing on mostly AI stuff, the takeover of AI and loss of human artistic production would result in everything getting crappy as AI models are trained by scraping mostly the production of other AIs.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 21 November 2024 at 4:10 pm UTC

Quoting: kokoko3k

Quoting: EhvisBecause the code that you use was written by the company that you licensed the engine from. With AI it is usually unclear what it's from and who is the rightful owner to the source material. Stores are simply attempting to cover their responsibility.

That covers the stores, not people pointing their fingers on this but not that.

The stores depend on artists, there's the angle of labour rights, wealth concentration, the question of promoting creativity vs slop… Cory Doctorow has written a ton about those questions. itch.io in particular has to be sensitive to the mood of indies lest they get pushed out.