Trained on vast quantities of public data, AI-generated art infringes upon intellectual property by using artists’ work without their consent. In attempts to combat this issue, founder and director of the Art and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at Rutgers University, Ahmed Elgammal, has created a platform for artists that acts as an empty “black box,” which pulls from a dataset exclusive to one’s own images. The AI model, known as Artendex, allows artists to train AI on their own images, thus preserving their unique artistic voice. Elgammal asserts, “We have a tradeoff. Should I use an AI model that’s only trained on 100 images, or a user AI that is trained on a billion images which are not mine?”
As artificial intelligence technologies permeate the creative landscape, artists find themselves at a crossroads. The rise of AI-generated art sparks heated debate within the art community, interrogating the implications and ethics of AI as a tool of artistic expression.
Thisbe Wu ’26, a painting and printmaking major, said plagiarism is a critical concern in today’s AI landscape. She draws parallels between collage work and AI-generated images, noting that while they both pull pieces from other artists, there exists a clear ethical distinction.
“When you see a collage, you can tell that each aspect came from something that you can identify,” she said, referencing various media and images pulled from magazines and other print sources. However, with AI, Thisbe noted, “the way the image is blended together, you can’t trace that back to another artist or to another piece of art a lot of the time.” This hodgepodge of multiple artists’ work, seamlessly blending into an AI image without attribution, blurs copyright lines. The technology’s infringement on intellectual property poses a myriad of legal questions, such as how to apply copyright, patent, and trademark laws to AI platforms.
The potential erosion of artistic identity is another pressing concern. Elgammal warns that widespread use of similar AI tools could lead to a homogenization of artistic expression: “One of the biggest problems in today’s AI art is that it wipes artist identity. I mean, if we all use the same tools, where is our identity?”
While the technology has its issues, many artists have found ways of leveraging it for their benefit. For these artists, AI serves as a tool rather than a replacement. Elgammal said artists deploy AI for both creative inspiration and volume. “Artists use AI to find new ideas… there is this element of serendipity search happening when you use AI.” This process allows artists to explore new avenues they may not have otherwise considered.
Graphic designer and lecturer at the Yale School of Art, Alvin Ashiatey, embraces the technology, integrating it into his teaching. He does not view AI as a threat to the design industry but rather an opportunity. “If you see it as a threat, then you might get stuck behind but it’s more of just figuring out how it fits within the discipline,” said Ashiatey.
Brennan Buck, an architect and lecturer at the Yale School of Art, acknowledges the competing impacts of AI art on artists. “On the positive side, it’s opened up new tools and new content for artists to explore. And on the negative side, it’s made artists feel exploited by AI that’s trained on their work.”
For Buck and his work, AI art platforms have served as a constructive tool, allowing him to express his visions in tangible ways. He uses ComfyUI with his students, a platform more customizable than other popular AI-image generators such as Midjourney and DALL-E, granting the user more control over the process. Regarding the integration of AI art in his own work, he says it has worked as an aid for him during the concept stage. For example, in the drawing process, where he makes architectural plans or sections with 3D models, AI allows him to generate an image that goes behind the plan, adding depth and realism. The tool has also enabled him to envision different types of atmospheres with a range of material palettes. This technique facilitates communication between Buck and his clients, as it permits him to translate his imagined architectural spaces into accessible renderings, so that others can see his vision.
Buck expressed, “The concern that I have about the future of AI in architecture, in particular, is that it may change the way that society at large values our work.” Buck fears that the need for skilled architects could decline as more people rely on AI to generate images that they used to rely on architects for. For example, people are now able to use AI to generate realistic looking images of their living rooms when they want to renovate them. Buck also believes, however, that there is a body of knowledge and skills learned in school that cannot be replaced by an AI-image generator. Knowledge about architectural history and conventions, for instance, as well as ways of thinking about value expression through architecture, are innately human. “So there’s an ethical side of architectural education as well, and none of that is replaced by AI. If more people are able to design buildings without that, I think that our building environment will suffer,” Buck said.
In this shifting landscape, where AI technologies are gaining capabilities previously exclusive to human creativity, artists grapple with concerns of obsolescence. For undergraduate art major Wu, AI’s rapid generation of images can feel discouraging, as it undermines artists’ efforts. She said, “I think [AI] can really easily trivialize people’s artwork livelihood to be, like, ‘we worked so hard on this, and an AI image can just do it,’ but the AI image isn’t really just doing it, because it’s taking art from existing artists and spitting it back out.”
Alex King, Editor-In-Chief of the aesthetics and philosophy of art blog Aesthetics for Birds—whose jurisdiction includes the intersection between AI art and ethics—reflects on the fears surrounding technological advancements, drawing parallels to the introduction of calculators. “People probably were wringing their hands when calculators came out…but it just forces you to rethink the value of traditional skills,” King said.
Yale School of Art’s Professor Alvin Ashiatey, who teaches graphic design, has not felt the effects of AI on his personal work. Rather, he has used the tool to his advantage to expedite the process of coding and creating websites. He does not perceive AI art as a threat to the design industry because the discipline of design is constantly evolving. Nevertheless, Ashiatey worries about what the future has in store. “Future wise, it is always scary because…it will touch everybody’s daily lives. I can’t really tell what the future holds, [but] I know it’s definitely going to be something we would have to contend with and figure out as we develop as people and develop with this system as well.”
Elgammal emphasized the practical benefits of AI art, particularly for new artists. “A typical emerging artist cannot afford [to hire assistants], and that’s why they like AI,” he says. “It gives them this luxury of having a workshop assistant without the expenses.” This democratization of resources can help bridge gaps in access and support universal artistic exploration.The discourse around AI art is just beginning. Artists and educators alike emphasize the need for thoughtful engagement with this technology, urging the art world to reflect on its implications for creativity and identity. As King, Editor-in-Chief of Aesthetics for Birds, succinctly puts it, “What’s important is that the art world is changing and moving in ways that are reflective and thoughtful about the role of this new technology.”