It’s not me saying it, it’s the lawyers. The jury is quite literally out own where the copyright lies on AI generated content. The only definite verdict has been that the AI itself isn’t it.

But whether it’s the one who created the model, prompted the model or the ones whose data was used to teach the model 🤷🏻‍♂️ Wibbly wobbly timey wimey

I get regular briefings about this at work, because we have really good lawyers who actually read contracts of the services we use. And have banned multiple ones due to … creative copyright clauses in their contracts.

As for your “generated code is plagiarism” argument, do you have any precedents on that because I’d be interested in reading the verdicts? If true it’s a massive game changer for many industries and open so fucking many companies to lawsuits.

“Useful Idiot” is the term Russia uses for them

It’s direct from the Russian playbook: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_generation_warfare

I have one ready to use but it’s trained with company assets and thus not something we can share or legal will have an aneurysm from how stupid we are being 😅

“Replace tools, not jobs” is the best way to use AI.

And also the one that works the best both for people and businesses.

Replacing jobs feels cooler for bosses though…

Sandfall Interactive further clarifies that there are no generative AI-created assets in the game. When the first AI tools became available in 2022, some members of the team briefly experimented with them to generate temporary placeholder textures. Upon release, instances of a placeholder texture were removed within 5 days to be replaced with the correct textures that had always been intended for release, but were missed during the Quality Assurance process

Sauce: https://english.elpais.com/culture/2025-07-19/the-low-cost-creative-revolution-how-technology-is-making-art-accessible-to-everyone.html

Not exactly a massive AI slop problem, right?

Because games are about the feels. And having crudely drawn dicks doesn’t exactly make QA work easy.

Also there’s lighting, reflections etc that need that shit to be close to real.

For the same reason movies use stand-ins to adjust lights and not a can of beans, which would be more fun

It’s a weird gray area. Nobody really knows where the limit is. The current consensus is that for a fact the “AI” can’t own a copyright to anything.

How smart can an autocomplete be before it takes away your copyright? Does using snippets count? How smart can the snippet engine be at filling the template?

If I ask AI how to solve something but write the exact same code myself, is it mine?

It If I grab code from stack overflow, does it make it mine?

This one here: https://www.scenario.com/

Also at least Rovio has had an “AI” art asset pipeline for years now, even before ChatGPT. Their ML unit is well over a decade old. And it’s specifically tuned for their own style: https://youtu.be/ZDrqhVSY9Mc

I’m not talking out of my ass, I work with this shit daily.

The problem is that Chinese, Indian and Turkish developers couldn’t care less about western AI purity tests and will blast past any competition who does.

Unless Captain AI Planet stops them, the cat is out of the bag and not going back.

If you want to run a AAA live service game the amount of content you put out every X weeks is how you make money. And the one who can keep up the best amount/quality ratio will always win.

The average gamer won’t care if the latest Gooner F2P or FPS game DLC is AI generated, AI assisted or lovingly hand crafted. They’ll throw their money at it anyway…

Not in general but for this at least? Maybe?

What about AI based autocomplete in an IDE, would that disqualify a game from this specific award?

It’s not a fantasy 😆 It’s an actual product everyone can use.

Sandfall Interactive further clarifies that there are no generative AI-created assets in the game. When the first AI tools became available in 2022, some members of the team briefly experimented with them to generate temporary placeholder textures. Upon release, instances of a placeholder texture were removed within 5 days to be replaced with the correct textures that had always been intended for release, but were missed during the Quality Assurance process

Sauce: https://english.elpais.com/culture/2025-07-19/the-low-cost-creative-revolution-how-technology-is-making-art-accessible-to-everyone.html

Not exactly a massive AI slop problem, right?

Can we put our collective pitchforks away for this case at least?

This time yes. But the rule ban any and all AI use during development. It doesn’t matter if it’s in the final product or not.

No no. The rules didn’t say “art” it was ALL AI use for the whole duration of the project. Planning, emails, research everything.

Not a single drop of AI is allowed.

So any game whose developer has used a recent version of VSCode will be disqualified in the future? VSCode has a GenAI autocomplete turned on by default.

One single question about an API to ChatGPT and your game is out.

Use Photoshops generative features for a marketing asset: out.

You get how insane the rule is?

You can only qualify it you write your game in vanilla vim with no extensions and graphics must be drawn in an old version of Gimp? 😆

They used AI for placeholder art.

It could’ve been literally Mickey Mouse downloaded from google images and still be fine. None of it was supposed to be shipped.

Big AAA studios have a person or team whose only job is to make sure that doesn’t happen. Smaller studios don’t.

So if I train a model from scratch using only my own art is it still bad?

Games were made by a single person not sleeping for a week.

But people expect more now and one person can’t do it fueled just by passion. The other people want to get paid now, not when the game is released.

Limiting the tools people can use to make games is ableist, elitist and just stupid.