Do we even know if the art in question was in fact AI art?

Even if that is truly a section of the contract vendors had to agree to rent a space at Dragon Con, all of the original coverage about this incident said it was a policy, not a line item in a contract. It feels a bit like moving the goalposts. Not that I’m accusing you of that. 🙂

I honestly don’t understand the uproar some people engage it when it comes to AI art. Even the most vocal anti-AI art people say AI art is easily identifiable. If that is true, why not let the market sort it all out? People say it’s theft. In a roundabout way, sure. Human made art is used to train AI on different art styles. Human made art is also used to train human made artists. As far as theft is concerned, I’ve witnessed large amounts of IP theft at every single con I’ve ever attended. Hell, I’ve probably even bought some of it. We’ve already got laws against selling IP without the owner’s permission. Cons never enforce this kind of theft. There are no laws against selling A.I. art.

The reaction people had over Dragon Con kicking the vendor out had a lot of the same energy book ban people have when they get a book removed from a school library. Again, let the market decide. If people don’t like AI art, let them vote with their wallets.