A lawyer suggests that Studio Ghibli might consider taking legal action against OpenAI

Studio Ghibli may sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI image generation.

: OpenAI's ChatGPT sparked a trend creating Ghibli-style images, leading to copyright debates. Studio Ghibli might pursue legal action under the Lanham Act for potential trademark infringement. Former Showtime counsel, Rob Rosenberg, suggests this usage could cause consumer confusion and infringe on Ghibli’s goodwill. The evolving legality of AI-generated content remains contested, with broader implications for copyright law.

In recent developments, OpenAI's AI chatbot tool, ChatGPT, has been at the center of a heated copyright debate. Users began generating images in the distinctive style of Studio Ghibli, which quickly went viral. OpenAI, known for its innovations in AI, responded by altering the tool's capabilities to reduce the production of these Ghibli-style images. This incident has reignited discussions on how generative AI potentially conflicts with established copyright laws and the creations of human artists.

Legal implications are under scrutiny, with Rob Rosenberg, a former general counsel for Showtime and an expert in AI, suggesting that Studio Ghibli could consider legal action against OpenAI under the Lanham Act. Enacted in 1946, this act is the principal federal statute on trademark law in the US, outlining legal recourse for trademark infringement and unfair competition. Rosenberg argues that OpenAI's actions could be seen as exploiting Ghibli's trademarks and sowing confusion among consumers, making it seem as if Studio Ghibli endorsed or licensed the AI tool.

In addition to trademark concerns, the issue of whether OpenAI’s model training constitutes fair use is in question. OpenAI's position has been that their actions fall under the fair use doctrine, which allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission for purposes like criticism or comment. However, as legal precedents are sparse, the outcome of such claims is unpredictable. Meanwhile, OpenAI and other tech giants like Meta are facing several lawsuits over similar allegations of copyright infringement involving the use of copyrighted online resources for AI training.

Studio Ghibli's potential legal response stems from worries about their intellectual property rights and consumer confusion. Rosenberg points out that Ghibli could argue the unauthorized use of its distinctive animation style detracts from their potential economic opportunities. For instance, if Ghibli wished to release its software for creating Ghibli-style images, OpenAI's tool might cannibalize that market. Broader concerns also include users creating entire animated works in the Ghibli style and misrepresenting them as genuine.

The uncertainty surrounding AI-generated content and its compliance with copyright law underscores the need for updated legal frameworks. Rosenberg suggests that unless the courts uniformly recognize AI model training as fair use, there might arise a precedent where AI developers must compensate copyright holders. This possible shift could significantly impact how companies like OpenAI and others operate, potentially mandating the attribution and payment for the use of copyrighted materials in AI outputs.

Sources: Futurism, The Verge, NHK, United States Patent and Trademark Office

LegalAICopyright