Raw LLM Responses

Uh several problems here. One, if someone takes a reference image and generates a new image for personal use, that's no different from an artist taking a reference for a commission like "Draw Goku, Draw Naruto" and getting paid for it (which many of them do). Also you're getting in weird territory because memes that are created by influencers LITERALLY do this without AI. They literally recolor someone else's art or put words on it and make a meme which is for personal use. There are even commission artists that draw copyright characters based on a reference image that is ALSO copyright (Naruto, Goku etc) then sell it for commission. This practically what AI art does for personal use art. AI isn't doing anything different then the issues with personal use art that have already persisted before it was a thing. Issues that some artists themselves have contributed to. Additionally, no artist works in a vacuum. I don't get this dramatic thinking like "my art is beings stolen" when youre posting it online in the first place AND people are already using it in the same way an AI is using it. Meaning theyre using it for inspiration as an artist. It's even being replicated sometimes as a reference for a commission by another artists. This happens just by posting it online. What your saying is a slippery slope and this is very dangerous territory because technically drawing a character owned by someone else or using it as a reference to create your own art could fall under the issues your pointing out. Even a slight recoloring of an image could fall into this. Now let's cover COMMERCIAL ART: For commercial use art, I haven't seen a SINGLE project by a author, game developer or anyone who's taken an AI image and used it for commercial use. It hasn't been done and is likely already illegal since most AI programs claim a "non-profit" standard to even have these apps protected under fair use in the first place. This changes nothing for commercial use art and for personal use, AI art isn't changing anything that was already a problem. I'm sorry but if someone wants to take a reference image (their own or someones) and generate a new one for PERSONAL USE. That's not anything someone can do something about and it been done for decades (memes, fake Twitter pfps etc) before AI was a thing. This is being overblown and in fact, it's what every commission artist on Twitter literally does (most artists ask for references). If someone takes a reference image of their own (a picture) and generates an image for PERSONAL use, it's ridiculous to be mad at that unless you just want them to come to you for any art need (which people can't afford ESPECIALLY for personal use). The salient issue here is time and effort and I think that's the best argument and one I'm willing to give in to. Artists put their time into this stuff and it sucks that a machine is minimizing that. But all the other arguments here are flimsy and a slippery slope.