{
  "id": 10692527,
  "title": "Art and copyright: How I learned to stop worrying and tolerate AI",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/09/29/art-and-copyright-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-tolerate-ai",
  "topic": "ai",
  "section": "AI",
  "published": "2026-09-29T12:34:31.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "The Art Newspaper",
    "slug": "the-art-newspaper",
    "url": "https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2026/09/29/art-and-copyright-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-tolerate-ai"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "Art and copyright: How I've come to accept AI's role in the creative world\n\nAs the director of the Institute of Art and Law, I never expected to write about artificial intelligence, despite it dominating recent discussions. However, with AI becoming increasingly integrated into various aspects of life, I've realized it's time to address its impact on the art world.\n\nArtists are understandably concerned about the unauthorized use of their work by AI models. The challenge lies in proving that a specific piece was used in training, making it difficult to establish copyright infringement. Additionally, training often takes place in countries different from where the affected creator resides, further complicating matters.\n\nPhotographers, writers, musicians, and designers are among those most affected by AI's capabilities. Prompting AI to produce works like screenplays, songs, logos, or illustrations can replicate original creative efforts, potentially displacing human artists from their jobs. While AI is unlikely to replace ambitious works by renowned artists like Anselm Kiefer or Kara Walker, it's improbable that it will replace the appeal of a gallery or museum exhibit.\n\nRecently, publishers and licensing bodies have begun engaging with AI companies in negotiations. I personally agreed to include my book in licensing deals with AI platforms, despite initial hesitation. Similarly, Getty Images recently partnered with OpenAI, allowing ChatGPT to incorporate licensed images for its users.\n\nEmily Gould, an AI expert at the Institute of Art and Law, predicts that such deals will become more common as collaborative licensing models prove beneficial. Artists and their estates could potentially generate royalties from AI-generated works, even if they are modest. Artists' societies, such as DACS in the UK, ADAGP in France, or ARS in the US, may also enter into agreements with AI companies to secure financial benefits.\n\nWhile the advent of AI may seem daunting for future artists, history provides a precedent. After the invention of photography in the 1860s, artistic innovation continued to flourish. New movements emerged, such as Impressionism, Pointillism, and Cubism, demonstrating that technological advancements can lead to fresh artistic expressions.\n\nAs AI becomes more prevalent, artists must find inventive ways to interpret our complex world, both with and without the assistance of artificial intelligence. Moreover, licensing agreements may become more prevalent, ensuring artists receive compensation for their work generated by AI. In the face of legal controversies and ethical concerns, an international framework to address these issues is crucial.",
  "summary": "Visual artists may have less to fear from AI than other creatives, but licensing agreements do point the way ahead",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}