Multiple "AI Art" Updates and Controversies in Tabletop Gaming

Three news stories this week came out about algorithmic generation aka "AI Art" in the tabletop gaming industry.

BackerKit announced that effective October 4, no project will be allowed with any writing or art assets that were entirely created by algorithmic generation aka “AI”. From the blog post:

At BackerKit, our team is passionate about people’s passions. For ten years, we’ve supported creators in their journey to launch projects and build thriving creative practices and businesses. We’ve developed deep relationships and respect for the people who breathe life into crowdfunding projects, and we are committed to defending their well-being on our platform.

That’s why we are announcing a new policy that aims to address growing concerns regarding ownership of content, ethical sourcing of data, and compensation for the process of creating content. […]

As part of this consideration, BackerKit has committed to a policy that restricts the use of AI-generated content in projects on our crowdfunding platform.

This policy goes into effect on October 4, 2023.

[…] This policy emphasizes that projects on BackerKit cannot include content solely generated by AI tools. All content and assets must first be created by humans.

This doesn’t impact content refined with AI-assisted tools like “generative content fill” or “object replacement” (image editing software functions that help blend or replace selected portions of an image), other standard image adjustment tools (saturation, color, resolution,) or AI language tools that refine human-created text with modifications to spelling, grammar, and syntax.

Software assisted by AI, such as transcribers or video tracking technology are permitted under these guidelines. However, software with the purpose to generate content using AI would not be permitted.

The post includes image examples of what content is and is not allowed. Additionally, BackerKit will add an option to the back end for creators that will allow them to “exclude all content uploaded by our creators for their projects from AI training”. This is opt-out, meaning that by default this ban is in place and creators who want their work used for training generative algorithms must go in and specifically allow it.

This move comes alongside a pair of recent controversies in tabletop gaming. Last month, Wizards of the Coast came under fire as it was revealed a freelance artist used algorithmic generation for artwork included in Bigby Presents: Glory of the Giants. Wizards of the Coast quickly updated their stance on algorithmic generation with a statement that the artwork would be removed from the D&D Beyond digital copies of the book and will place new language in contracts banning the use of algorithmic generation.

This week, Gizmodo reporter Linda Codega reported that the artwork in the D&D Beyond version of Bigby Presents has now been replaced with new art. No announcement was made about the new artwork, and Gizmodo’s attempts to contact Wizards of the Coast for a statement directed them to the statement made in August. The artist who used algorithmic generation, Ilya Shkipin, has been removed from the art credits from the book, and the artwork has replaced by works by Claudio Prozas, Quintin Gleim, Linda Lithen, Daneen Wilkerson, Daarken, and Suzanne Helmigh.

Meanwhile, the largest tabletop gaming convention in Europe, Essen Spiel, recently ran into the same controversy as promotional material for the convention used algorithmically generated artwork including the convention’s official app, promotional posters, and tickets for the event.

Marz Verlag, the parent company for the convention, responded to a request for comment from Dicebreaker:

"We are aware of this topic and will evaluate it in detail after the show. Right now please understand that we cannot answer your questions at this moment, as we have a lot to do to get the show started today," said a representative for Merz Verlag.

"Regarding the questions about Meeps and timing, I can tell you quickly that the marketing campaign [containing AI artwork] has been created way before we had the idea to create a mascot. The idea of Meeps had nothing to do with the marketing campaign and vice versa."

Meeps, a board game-playing kitten and totally innocent of the controversy (because who could blame a cute kitty), is the new mascot for the convention announced this past July voted on by fans and was designed by illustrator Michael Menzel.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

The solution is simple though; just manually edit away any stray signatures before you use an AI work for anything.

 

[FrogReaver]

The solution is simple though; just manually edit away any stray signatures before you use an AI work for anything.

That doesn’t solve all the other copying that the copied signature is just direct evidence of.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

That doesn’t solve all the other copying that the copied signature is just direct evidence of.

That's still not how it works.

 

[FrogReaver]

That's still not how it works.

then how does the signature get there?

 

[J.Quondam]

As I understand it, the signature issue is an outdated problem at this point. It's a known serious issue, and is being actively corrected. It will be engineered away soon, if it isn't already.

Anecdotally, I've been playing with a free online image generator built on a recent rev of the latest generation AIs, DALL-E 3 and ChatGPT4. I've churned out hundreds of images and I've seen thousands of others, yet I haven't spotted a single art signature or stockphoto watermark. (I've never asked for one specifically, though, which would be an interesting test.) A year ago and with any (free) AI tool, those marks appeared on most any image generated, like a pox. But they're almost eradicated now, afaict.

Many technical issues that threaten to stir up big legal problems (eg, training consent, copying signatures, regenerating IP, etc), are mostly identified pretty early on, and then fixed ASAP thereafter. They have to, because it would be legally stupid not to fix these issues quickly.*

So... what issues are NOT going away in the next version of the "AI" app? The ethical ones regarding compensation and jobs; creator power vs corps; credit and recognition; safety vs choice; free speech, fair use vs IP; privacy; AI regulation; and so forth.



* Of course, it would be better not to deploy a tech willy-nilly without fixing issues before they become a problem. The techbro mantra "It's easier to ask forgiveness than permission" needs to end.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

then how does the signature get there?

I explained that just a few posts ago.

 

[J.Quondam]

In short: it doesn't matter how the AI generated my signature. It still looks like my signature. It just has to look close enough for people (i.e., humans) to get confused, and then we have problems.

Sure, but that's a problem no matter how that copied signature was generated. It doesn't matter that it came out of an "AI" , versus a photocopier, camera, copy-paste function in photoshop, or human skilled at hand forgeries.
What is relevant is what the copy is (ie, whose sig? is it passable? etc) and what's done with the copy (ie, forged financial doc? counterfeit art? ID theft? etc)

 

[FrogReaver]

I explained that just a few posts ago.

I didn’t see you admit it was copied

 

[Bill Zebub]

I suspect the only thing that is ever going to persuade anybody, on either side, is seeing how things turn out in ten years.

And, even then, if recent experience is a guide, most of those who turn out to have been wrong will rationalize why they were not.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I didn’t see you admit it was copied

Now why could that be?