A I Literacy of All Kinds of Creators
Survey target: Creators in all sectors
Method of survey: Internet
Number of answers: 26,891 responses
Survey Period: 8th May – 28th May 2023
Survey Author: Arts Workers Japan (All rights reserved.)
Unauthorized use and diversion prohibited.
If use the surveyed results, contact to this form.

1Greetings.
8th June 2023
We would like to express our most sincere thanks to the 26,891 people who answered our Surveyof “A I Literacy of All Kinds of Creators”.
We have read and totalled each and every one of your responses with great care. We are surprised
and heartbroken by the sheer amount of damage and the helplessness of the situation.
We have discussed your situation internally and exchanged opinions with experts from home andabroad and have learned about the current situation of the creators from multiple viewpoints. We
then compiled your requests as carefully as possible and handed them over to the ministries
yesterday.
We apologize for not being able to publish all the voices, but we would like to present the results
here to strengthen the feeling that "We're not alone in our problems", just as the problems of
Workplace, Accidents, Health and Safety and Harassments.
In soridarity,
Arts Workers Japan©ArtsWorkersJapan2

What’s your gender?

1. female
2. Male3. Other, I do not wish to answer©ArtsWorkersJapan3

What is your occupa<on?

1.Performer 2. Staﬀ 3. Wri<ng creators 4. Press
5.Journalists 6. Ar<sts 7. Photographers 8. Others©ArtsWorkersJapan4

Have you seen AI-generated content?

②0.5%
③0.4%

©ArtsWorkersJapan

1. Yes
2. No
3. I don't know.

5Are you worried about losing jobs as AI advances?

1. Yes
2. No
3. I don't know.

©ArtsWorkersJapan

6

Are you worried about infringements of rights and other harmful eﬀects of AI?

4.1%
2.1%

©ArtsWorkersJapan

1. Yes
2. No
3. I don't know.

7What are you worried about?

1. lose my job 2.Reduced remunera<on 3. Technology is stolen 4.Mo<va<on is lost
5. Cannot con<nue to work 6. Exploited without permission. 7. Lose my rights
8. Pride in my work 9. Others©ArtsWorkersJapan8

If you're a vic<m of AI, Where do you consult?

1.Digital Agency, 2. Agency for Cultural Affairs 3. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications
4. Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare 5. Police 6. Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
7. Local government 8. Others 9. I don't know
©ArtsWorkersJapan9

Q7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)○ Damage Illustrations, drawings, cartoons, animations, voices, faces, texts, novels, translations, etc., were learned or plagiarised. Technology was taken.
Crime. My creative spirit has been discouraged. There was mental damage. I lost or lost my job.
○ Infringements 2099 infringements of rights and intellectual property property. Moral infringement, used for child pornography/adult entertainment, etc.
○ Respondents Illustrators, painters, artists, cartoonists, novelists, musicians, voice actors, models, translators, actors, photographers, game producers,
writers, others.
1.

Used on Chinese websites.

2.

The translation school I attended has released AI subtitles, but has not revealed what the training data is. It is possible that translations from previous graduates andregistered translators are being used.

3.

We don't know if it has already been used and that is a concern.

4.

They used my mugshot instead of my artwork; AI users generate obscene and dignity-destroying illustrations to insult me and send them to my personal email.

5.

An example of intensive learning of my own work with home-made models. I make my own models and distribute them myself to A so that memes of my work will continue
to be produced even after I am gone.

6.

Illustrations have been plagiarised by AI, and furthermore, unauthorised intensive learning models have been created and disseminated on foreign websites.

7.

Damage to dignity through unauthorised learning8.

It is possible that your own published work has already been incorporated into the generating AI. It is not even possible to check for infringements if the learning content
is kept secret or in a black box state.

9.

I am an illustrator and I have confirmed that my work is being used in a dataset for a service called B. I'm really annoyed that not only me but many illustration data arebeing used in the study material and it is impossible to opt out.

10. AI learnt my work on its own on an illustration submission website.
11. No own work. Child pornography, deep fakes and deals with models specialising in personalised artwork on illustration submission websites, as well as AI that reproduces
the voices of voice actors, have been identified. A number of AI technologies for disguise are being released daily and are becoming very critical.
12. The AI put the picture I submitted through.
13. The AI is trained as a dataset for each site (c) where the illustration has been reproduced without permission.
14. A large number of reprinted websites from which the generative AI was trained.
15. Regeneration of hand-drawn illustrations through AI (image 2 image), creation and distribution of picture learning models (lora)

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
16. I am a student who went to art school from high school and I am still studying painting. I was not satisfied with the current situation of unreasonable generative AI, and I
had been tweeting my doubts and opinions on Twitter while also expressing my opinions to the Ministry of Culture and the parliamentarians, when I was i2i'd by"Mizushima Ferreri" for my icon and put it on his portfolio website. The title was very insulting, with the word "Giant Head" written in Roman characters. Ferreri Ruijima
was the perpetrator of a previous NHK news story about plagiarism by an image-generating AI (the site has now been deleted, but a screenshot from that time remains).
17. As an illustration-related business myself, I see the rampant violence caused by AI on a daily basis. I also follow litigation cases and strikes in the USA. I am grateful thata large organisation in Japan has raised its voice in protest.
18. Landscape photos posted on a personal blog were used as training data.
19. Currently, mainstream AI has completed its basic system by collecting billions of images from datasets such as LAION-5B, a dataset created for research purposes(which also includes images from personal medical records, war records, child pornography, execution photos, etc.) and C, a D illegal reprint site. In other words, thepossibility cannot be denied that all images posted on the internet are used for learning. It is not an exaggeration to say that every creator who has ever uploaded theirwork to the internet could have had their work used for AI training. The content of this Q7 question either does not understand or ignores that assumption.
20. Generating imitations using their own models
21. My work is registered with LION5B.
22. Check your published cartoons on the website to check the dataset.
23. Painter. The entire work was converted and sold using image to image generation IMAGE TO IMAGE.
24. Although not my own work, I often saw other people's drawings reproduced by AI without their permission.
25. The unauthorised reproduction site C, which also reproduces my illustrations without permission, is considered to be the source of B's study data, but because of the low
cost, the client used B to output a character designed by me without permission and announced that the character was designed by me (the details such as the hair style
are different). This is clearly an infringement of moral rights. This clearly constitutes an infringement of moral rights.
26. Illustrations were plagiarised via AI using the i2i method.
27. Plagiarism is being victimised by image refinement AI (image to image).
28. My illustrations were altered by the i2i function of the image-generating AI.
29. Drafts were imported without permission.
30. I draw and work in comics, and I have seen fans of my work personally attempt to use AI to create imitations of characters and stories from my work. (There were severalof them, so there may be more where I don't know. I wanted them to stop, but I didn't particularly ban them because the ones I saw were quite low level and they seemedto just be enjoying themselves personally at the moment).
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
31. Submitted illustrations have been altered by AI and sent to us
32. They've added an automatic unauthorised learning function on a large illustration submission website, and it's possible that your work is amongst them.
33. His own work was used on i2i to generate images without his permission.
34. I have had my work reproduced without permission on the website of an overseas source of learning.
35. Artists of my acquaintance have already complained of damage caused by illustration-generating AI. Monetisation through the abuse of some patronage sites is also
rampant, and urgent countermeasures and legislation are required.
36. We have confirmed that at least five of our own works are included in the LAION-5B, which is the basic data for the image generation AI.
37. My illustrations were reproduced without permission and used as training material for AI via there. My illustrations were used in AI without permission (image2image) andregistered on a portfolio site as someone else's work in a slightly different style
38. The picture was deliberately stolen and then defamed.
39. Images posted on Twitter or D were used by a third party without permission. *Numerous examples of this
40. The rough images I gave as progress were eaten and put on the internet as finished products. After that, I became scared and it became difficult to submit rough drafts.
41. I had several illustration data of my own in LAION5B. （When I instructed the generation with the name of a character I had designed (although the client holds the
copyright), the character came up. The character I created also comes out with high accuracy from a generation AI that uses other databases.
42. The current content infringement cannot be stopped because the prohibited content, such as fan art, is also output for sale price with impunity.
43. I don't know if directly or not, but dozens of works have been reproduced without permission in C and other places.
44. The client uses the delivered picture for i2i and publishes it.
45. i2i for harassment purposes.
46. AI theft of painting styles.
47. Their drawings are learnt by Lora and used for commercial activities. If you express a negative opinion about AI, you are persistently sent a copy of your drawing throughi2i and harassed, saying that AI is better than you and that you should stop drawing by hand.
48. photograph in which one is photographed
49. He has created a lora file, in which he has concentrated and studied his own style, and has generated work that looks just like his own.
50. Illustrators of my acquaintance, though not myself, have suffered a great deal of damage due to the exercise of AI technology by malicious ones, resulting in very fast andeasy plagiarism and copyright infringement in a number of areas.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
51. Illustrations I posted on Twitter and D were altered by AI without my permission and posted as the work of the person who altered them. Also, a specialised model bearing
my name and design has been created and distributed on the internet without my permission.
52. An illustrator I know says that his income has decreased noticeably as AI has started to create a very similar style of art.
53. I am not one myself, but I often see my favourite painters being victimised, and the humiliating feeling of having the identity or not effort you put your life on the line fortaken away in an instant and played with as you please is immeasurable. This is a violation of human rights.
54. Image generation AI, such as Stable Diffusion, is fundamentally different from learning, which humans acquire through practice by referring to other people's work as
reference material, as it takes in other people's work as data as it is. All illustrators are already using their own artwork for AI.
55. It is said that there is no image that has not been eaten by AI, so it is probably already being eaten.
56. The AI took my illustrations without my permission and generated a large number of illustrations with similar patterns and compositions.
57. I couldn't for the life of me come up with a composition for the illustration, so I output it in AI. Sometimes I only use the composition or the pose of the person as areference.
58. I often see on Twitter and illustration posting sites that there are an unexpectedly large number of people who use AI to extract other people's illustrations without
permission, although I myself have not yet done so, and that there are in fact many cases of damage such as self-created remarks and rights issues.
59. Recognition that everything that is already on the internet to date is being used for learning.
60. Although not their own work, some people have taken the liberty of learning wholesome illustrations for the previous age group and generating adult illustrations, and evenprofiting from them in the D fan BOX.
61. A work that he had spent a week creating was i2i'd without permission.
62. D and used as a source of AI without permission; the same applies to Twitter and Instagram. You might wish you didn't use the service, but in a number of cases it isunavoidable because of the large share of promotional activity it provides to employers.
63. I am a game illustrator, but I am in a situation where my designs and style itself are copied and I can continue to create forgeries. However, because they are a part of amixed style of many illustrators, they cannot even claim that they have been victimised unless the data used is disclosed, although they themselves feel that they arebeing used.
64. The AI's own images are included in the AI's main dataset.
65. AI generation is carried out based on their own work, which they sell and profit from.
66. I confirmed that my name is included in the list of artists in the images trained on some of the models.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
67. Adult doujinshi works are being sold by others on a website that sells adult doujinshi works, who appear to have learnt my designs from LoRA. The seller himself is keeping
quiet and the selling site is not taking any action. I am very frustrated.
68. Illustrator. A foreign site called [B] officially said on Twitter that they had learnt about it on an unauthorised foreign site called [C]. I checked and found that myillustrations were also reproduced on C without permission.
69. Plagiarised by Ferreri using the i2i method, which was also introduced on NHK.
70. Used as training data to auto-generate AI through unauthorised reprinting to C
71. The works that had been published on D were converted into Lora data and published without permission. I feel that the technology and passion that I poured my flesh
and blood into and nurtured has been usurped, and I am extremely displeased. I feel nothing but anger and frustration.
72. My picture is being used without my knowledge because it has been reproduced on an unauthorised website without my permission.
73. Imitated a work by a specific person and sold it without permission. Rewarded for drawing existing copyrighted characters in violation of the guidelines.
74. Illegal models of my designs are being spread (under the name of my illustrator).
75. My work was used by a third party without permission.
76. They are scraped without permission and their work is stored in the AI model.
77. There are people who are learning AI to harass other people's work, which I don't have, but as a real problem, they are doing it to block revenue and generate
pornographic works to make a bad impression.
78. I am a student aspiring to become an illustrator. I have not received any reports of any actual damage, but I have to hide my illustrations from websites such as D
because they are so outlawed by AI. Losing the opportunity to have my pictures seen even a little = future uncertainty.
79. Creating monthly subscription software by learning images and illustrations from the internet without permission, or infringing the copyright of a particular creator bymaking that software learn illustrations of that creator without permission. Generating illustrations for commercial purposes of works for which secondary creation forcommercial purposes is prohibited. Generating large numbers of sexual images of children and publishing or selling them online (child pornography).
80. We work as an illustrator. Some companies include in their order requirements that we do not handle or draw R18 works, so we do not handle adult content, but an R18 AI
illustration was created and sold to a company that looked exactly like our picture. We usually take care not to draw R18 illustrations when accepting various projects, but
because the design is so similar, there is a possibility that we will no longer be able to accept corporate projects due to reputational damage. In some cases, my name has
been attached to illustrations made with AI, which makes me feel more threatened.
81. People are always stealing my work without pay and there is nothing I can do about it
82. Writers' works, whether well-known or unknown, were used without permission and misused commercially.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
83. There is a type of AI image generator that allows users to learn the pattern of an illustration by giving their own illustration image. I have been slandered by an AI systemthat reads images to which it has no rights (i.e. my illustrations and others' without permission) and tells me to 'draw it more like this'. Other illustrators have lost theirjobs because they learn similar patterns in this way.
84. The illustrations produced were used as training material. While this in itself is legal, there are many cases where the morals of many users of the image-generating AI
rolled out by it are clearly flawed.
85. That the composition, colouring and character posing of the illustrations were exactly as they were, but the self-proclaimed AI artist declared them to be his own work,and both moral rights and copyright law were disregarded. Creators are not protected. In fact, people around me laughed and told me that if I asked an AI to create apainting like yours in an instant, I wouldn't ask them to work for me anymore, and they cut me out of the contract. If the country calls itself a manufacturing nation, it
should protect the sites where things are really made. Otherwise, there will be no individuality as an added value and everything will become a parallel visual, and domestic
and foreign customers will simply leave.
86. There was a person who generated AI based on his own paintings (about 80% similar in composition/style/colouring to the original) and sold them. When we contacted
them, we received a reply saying that they had no rights to the style of their paintings and that their income had increased a lot thanks to WWW.
87. Others have learnt my own illustrations and output look-alike pictures and post them on the internet, which also generates revenue.
88. Output AI of characters and other elements of your novel. Output image diagrams in AI.
89. R18 AI illustrations are generated by learning the patterns of my illustrations in content where secondary creation of R18 illustrations is prohibited, and are even sold for afee. If the rights holders see this as a problem, there is a risk that I, who have done nothing wrong, will be wrongly sued, and the content may eventually be terminated.
90. B disclosed that the images from the study source were collected from a site called C, where unauthorised reproduction is rampant. My productions were also reproduced
there without permission.
91. Although I have not yet been affected myself, I have seen some unwelcome behaviour, such as learning pictures by popular artists and outputting them as adult-oriented.
92. He found several of his own illustrations used without permission in the dataset used for training.
93. I too have started to refrain from publishing illustrations that I think will be learnt by AI, and I am very troubled by this. I think it's strange that AI is learning theillustrations of creators I like without my permission and making a profit from those illustrations. There have been cases where adult pictures of painters and actresses
who do not draw adult pictures have appeared, and illustrations they have drawn have been sent to the artists to harass them, which I think is defamation. There havealso been cases of pornographic illustrations of small children's photos being studied, spread and sold with impunity, which I think may be a violation of children's rights.
94. As background image, etc., in connection with the publication of musical works.
95. I have seen AI illustrations with similar patterns to illustrations produced by myself. I felt very threatened.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
96. I have been creating illustrations in detail, but my R18 and other adult-oriented works have been generated by an AI that has learned my patterns without my permission(although I have not made any profit).
97. I've received a DM on a social networking site that said, "I've learned your illustration and copied the pattern!" I have been sent a DM saying
98. Not knowing that it was clearly used is a major problem.
99. I don't know when, where or by whom it is being stolen. I can't sleep because I'm stressed when that thought comes to mind.
100. Illustration works were used for AI training without permission, and the generated pictures were used for products without permission as goods with their own remarks, tothe detriment of the company.
101. The illustrations were reprinted without permission on a website called C and are being used for learning. Naturally, we have not authorised the reproduction or the use of
the learning for AI.
102. Unauthorised reproduction of copyrighted images used in AI learning and used as a money-making tool.
103. The AI has evolved to a level where it is impossible to tell.
104. The code is on GitHub, so it could have been used for learning (but it was originally open source, so no particular problem).
105. The illustrations were "modified" using the image to image function of the image generation AI. It was able to imitate the characteristics of its own work using amechanism called LoRA, which can "intensively learn" the characteristics of a particular artist by learning additionally to existing learning models. (This is not a problem
when dealing with humans, unless you have a lot of experience. However, if you are dealing with AI, a machine with extraordinary productivity, your work will be buried andyour sales channels will be cut off.)
106. The work was posted on a social networking site and was subjected to AI and claimed to be of my own making.
107. My drawings were compiled on illegal websites without permission and used as AI sources. My drawing pattern and name were used without permission and published as
00 (my PN) style AI illustrations.
108. I think the sentence generation AI has long since learnt what sentences I have written in the past.
109. A number of works, including his own, were reproduced on a website for a community of illustration contributors to an overseas piracy site that copied the site, and were
further collected as AI material from that copying site.
110. I work in animation. Although not my own work, there have been examples of me using it for background art.
111. Although not his own work, a well-known illustrator has seen his designs stolen and used them to create adult content for "works banned for adult content". Furthermore,
AI users continue to sell the content to make money and ignore the warnings of the victim illustrators. They do this with the understanding that current laws cannot stop
AI-based plagiarism. Clearly, this is a malicious and harmful problem for Japanese creators. Japan's world-class creativity is at risk.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
112. Maybe I just haven't found it in my own work, but I still get angry when I see so many examples of people around me who have been used and get upset, and when I see
people with no morals feeding AI to similar works without permission and then attacking them for doing so, what is copyright? ...? I wonder. I feel that it is only a matter oftime before I too will be attacked.
113. When generating certain characters, a small number of illustrations are used to compensate for decorations and other elements that cannot be reproduced by AI alone.
This is an act of copyright infringement by any measure, but it is unchecked on the basis of a shallow understanding that 'learning is legal'.
114. Not to himself, but his fellow illustrators have already been affected. Third parties who learn illustrations without permission and use AI are profiting from it without theirpermission.
115. There is no way to even check everything. It is mechanically read, processed and reconstructed in a very close state of unauthorised, mechanically read and processed,
and the benefits and images are damaged. When we speak out against this state of affairs, we are subjected to many types and quantities of verbal abuse, such as 'people
with no understanding and no brains'. It is very painful and I think about human rights every day.
116. I work for a credit card company and we can already see a lot of fraudulent use of AI services with other people's credit cards. It is disturbing to think that the stolencards are being used to assemble AI text, draw AI pictures, create fake websites with a plausible appearance, advertise online, and then used for shady deals somewhere
else without any original funding.
117. An AI conversion of an illustration drawn by someone he knew, but not himself, was posted on an illustration social network. The AI user was earning a fee for the use of
the AI conversion of other people's drawings.
118. It is unclear if the output is actually being output by the AI, but it is very offensive because it has been reproduced without permission on the platform from which the AI
was trained and tagged in a way that could be pornographic.
119. Mentally, I dare not look into it.
120. The study source's own work is reproduced on an illegal upload site.
121. Illustration work was used almost verbatim for illustration AI and copyright was infringed
122. His own work was AI-illustrated without his permission and the AI-illustrated image was distributed as a copyright-free illustration.
123. Icon creation, text creation
124. We don't know; it is near impossible to reverse engineer AI works, and our own work is being stolen without our knowledge.
125. Although it is not my full-time job, I produce illustrations and book binding designs. The person who used to commission me to do cover illustrations for his coteriemagazine started using AI and I no longer receive requests from him.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
126. We see many illustrators being persistently harassed by AI on social networking sites. However, if all the data you put on the internet becomes a source of learning for AI,
there is a possibility that it is being used without your knowledge, just like the fraudulent use of credit cards. I already don't feel comfortable with the current situation
where I can't say that there is no possibility of being used for good or bad just because I can't be aware of it.
127. Illustrations for novels
128. The damage caused by impersonation and the use of names by others to make rough money has already been horrifying. It has led to obstruction of business, defamationand fraud.
129. I can't stand the fact that some of my favourite artists' drawings are turned into data and distributed as learning material and people are profiting from it. They boldly saythat there is no copyright on their drawings, but can they really do anything about it? Recently, there is even an AI that removes and extracts tones from comic bookpatterns, which is really outrageous. Help.
130. Improvement of melody generation and sound quality of sound sources131. F was used in an entry for a contest aimed at learning game engines; it was processed from an AI-generated image and used as a texture for a 3D model. In order not toclosely resemble the style of existing artists, I tried to take as much care as I could at my own discretion not to include the name of the artist or organisation in theprompt.
132. Models under his own name were made abroad.
133. Auto colouring function
134. Production of image screen mocks of productions
135. Used for video correction of surveillance cameras, currently of no practical use.
136. The situation where even the designs of illustrators who are not themselves successful are being imitated is abnormal, and if left unchecked, newcomers will not be
trained and the industry will die.
137. novel
138. My work has been altered into adult sexual images (content that violates the guidelines for derivative works).
139. Although not yet, we are aware that actual damage has started to be caused by imitations of pictures and other works by well-known people.
140. My own production illustrations were used for AI training for sexual alteration. I consider this very dangerous as it seriously damages my image as I do a lot of work forthe public.
141. The writing industry has been victimised by unsolicited translation and publication of works by foreign countries for a long time, but no effective countermeasures havebeen taken at all. (The big publishing houses are probably doing something about it, but micro-writers have nothing to do about it.)
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
142. The i2i method made a picture of the same "composition, colour and pose" of an illustration that he had created, and published it as if it were his own original work.
143. Most of the time it's happening where the painter doesn't know if it's been used or not, and that's a problem too.
144. My illustrations were being published on the internet as they were, after being run through AI tools and output as different illustrations (some of which were paid for).
(Some of them were paid for.) I was contacted by a third party via DM and discovered the above (I was told that they were using illustrations of several people other thanmyself without permission. The other party was not actively involved in social networking activities and it was difficult to contact them directly (I had a strong desire notto get involved in the first place. I even requested that the website itself on which they were published be deleted. I thought about requesting the website itself to remove
the illustrations, but the procedure was complicated and it seemed difficult to present clear evidence, so I gave up on the idea.
145. Basically, AI use is forbidden, but those who use AI can't read Japanese or English or they are being used. The quality is bad because they don't quit even if you warn
them.
146. Music production. The data was used to develop an automated composition AI.
147. The image generation AI B collects data from the site C, which deals with unauthorised reproduction and illegal uploads, and my data is among them, so it is being usedwithout permission. In both cases, I only know this because the company that generated the AI has given me the means to check, but in reality, without the need todisclose the data used in the current machine learning process, it is impossible to prove how much of my work is being used by third parties. to use my work, there is no
way to prove it from the outside. Despite this, because generative AI is, by its very nature, dependent on learning data to produce results, those who use it are in asituation where they are unilaterally free-riding on the results. Furthermore, if only companies are collecting and learning the data, but individuals like StableDiffusion areable to perform additional learning in their local environment, the creators of valuable data will forever be subject to exploitative free-riding, unless the law makes what
exists now illegal. The data creators will forever be subjected to exploitative free-riding.
148. It was used to draft settings for novels and to research the indigenous beliefs of ethnic minorities.
149. I have been sold a collection of illustration materials that look exactly like the AI version of the illustration collection I created. Reported. The name of the product isalmost the same, the composition of the material and the cover are exactly the same, but the material is AI-imported and realistic, and the variation of the material is thesame, which is a sure-fire crime. Furthermore, it was not indicated that it was an AI product, and when an enquiry was made to the sales website, it was said that it could
not be determined that it was an AI product, and the report was not passed (however, it was withdrawn at a later date, so it is thought that a contact was made).
150. The composition of the cosplay was used as a reference, read and used
151. As a translator, I sometimes use machine-learning-based translation tools such as E as a draft. However, with the current AI system, it is impossible to "understand thecontext", and sentences that the AI does not understand are omitted, so it is impossible to really use them in my work. AI support functions are considered to havegreatly improved the workability.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
152. In the first place, it also assists the data scientist. AI is also used in other ways, such as plotting out illustration subcontracts, adjusting the volume of sound source datain the first place, and automatic focus and exposure adjustment built into the camera itself.
153. A third party puts a rough drawing published on Twitter into an AI and colours it with a pen, etc., claiming it to be their own image. Or the author of the original picture
claims that he/she is the author of the AI-generated image.
154. They were i2i'd for harassment purposes.
155. I have had my illustrations converted to another illustration in AI. I contacted them and they erased it, but I thought it would be a hassle if they refused.
156. It's not my work, but a friend of mine's work was learned and sold by an AI without her permission. I see such cases every day. Please crack down on this.
157. When creating teaching materials for use in schools, questions often take the form of reading and answering questions, but it is difficult to identify when students havesubmitted output and created texts using the writing AI that has become popular in recent years.
158. Work submitted to an illustration submission website was imitated and a request to remove the work was refused as it was not copyrighted.
159. I work in the manga illustration industry, and I find that current AIs are often used not to support creators, but to infringe on the rights of hand-drawn creators and toharass hand-drawn creators. We have seen problems such as the unauthorised distribution of an AI that purports to be "an AI that can reproduce Mr A's drawing
pattern", slander such as "with this AI, Mr A is unnecessary", and the creation of drawings that Mr A did not intend (such as extreme, sexual or violent drawings). There
are also a certain number of people who use generative AI but hide it, pretending to be a hand-drawn illustrator and offering work by saying 'this is my hand-drawn work'.
If a company fails to spot this and offers a job, the AI user may suddenly give up the job or have trouble with the company if the job is "a delicate request that is difficult
for the generated AI to handle". Furthermore, as the AI collects images from the internet without permission, there is a high possibility that it will output images that
infringe on the copyrights of existing creators' works, which, if used without the company's knowledge, could lead to lawsuits and damage the company's image.
160. The source code of the programme stored on GitHub is being used to learn GitHub copilot.
161. The novel I wrote was put directly into the AI script and illustrations were generated without my permission.
162. Creating games using AI output illustrations.
163. I was told that my illustrations were learnt and output with the same pattern and that the pattern was not copyrighted and the learning was not illegal.
164. When I wrote the standing picture for the V-tube, my illustration was hung on the AI without permission.
165. The client had loaded an illustration (an icon for social networking sites) drawn on request into AI without permission, used an illustration almost identical in compositionand pose as a new icon, and increased the facial expression differences without permission. We warned the client, and he removed the illustrations, but we are extremely
concerned about AI illustrations being created by people who do not understand copyright.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
166. This is a story of a digital illustration work, in which an account with the same name as yourself was created without your knowledge, and a completely different accountusing your name posted a new work that was generated by having an AI learn your work without your permission. The learning is nothing more than a synthesis of existingmaterial, and there is no sense of creativity in it, and if you are profiting from it by pretending to be you, it is already an unforgivable act. The fake account no longer
exists, but it is frightening to think that this kind of thing might happen again in the future, or that there might be someone so vicious that they won't quit even if we
appeal to them.
167. Illustration submission website D learned my illustrations and generated illustrations on its own, and sent me a message saying 'I don't want any more of your drawings'.
168. Plagiarism is output by stealing the composition and design of other people's work through the filter (image to image) of AI. They also obstruct the business of actual
illustrators and infringe their moral rights by having the AI continuously learn the works of the same illustrator, establish a dataset bearing that person's name, and output
it.
169. Illustrator. I am active in in-game illustrations and G (online distributor using illustrations) illustrations. The illustrations we delivered were used for AI learning without
permission, and the AI illustrations we output were used. The client does not own the copyright. Although this case was within the scope of personal use and there was no
major damage in terms of profit, anyone can easily take away work and rights, and I felt a great deal of sadness, anxiety and resentment as a matter of pride and a senseof crisis at the possibility of misuse. Not only from the point of view of pride, but we have also heard that "the design is imitated and profits are raised", "backgroundillustrations output by AI are distributed free of charge as materials, and the market of illustrators specialising in backgrounds is destroyed", "to protect against malicious
learning, the work is made private and the opportunity to publish it is lost", etc. We have also seen cases of creators rejecting AI learning and having their illustrations
learn randomly despite having a watermark on them, and we have seen people working with AI output of G illustrations, which we fear could lead to a market collapse.
170. There are a number of AI like "(handle name) style picture generators" that have been created by learning the work of a particular illustrator. I am worried because I am
no stranger to this.
171. My copyrighted illustrations were used in an AI study. I tried to warn the person in question, but he was not a talkative person to begin with. They went through with it. I
can't sue them for copyright and I am very troubled. It is a problem that cannot be overlooked when people with a low awareness of literacy about their work use AI todeceive artists into believing that their skills are their own, thereby dampening the enthusiasm of artists who have put their money and heart and soul into the illustrations
they have created. Please raise awareness of this issue.
172. His own illustrations have been used without permission for local modifications in 18-rated AI works.
173. They have studied multiple illustrations, etc., by a certain well-known illustrator, and in order to obtain rewards on support websites, they list an impossible amount of
humanly possible results and claim the rights to them as their own work, etc.
174. I work as an illustrator and I am uncomfortable that it is being used to learn AI and I have my own personal AI.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
175. My illustration work was used as a training model for AI to generate similar illustrations
176. When I posted an illustration on a social networking site, a stranger posted a reply saying "I used AI to make your illustration better", and I felt very uncomfortablebecause my illustration was turned into an AI illustration without my permission.
177. In the first place, what is published in D is being used without permission under the guise of learning, and the mixture of outputs is being published without permission.
178. I have had a model for a voice changer (that can speak in a learned voice) distributed and sold, which seems to have been AI-learnt without my permission, based on avoice I have made public (secondary use and distribution are prohibited by the terms of the agreement). It is believed that a friend of mine who is engaged in similar
activities has been similarly victimised, but he claims that he received it from a volunteer anonymous donor, so he is unable to scrutinise it. It is difficult to prove if theyuse mixed learning (a method of mixing data from different people so that the original source cannot be identified), and it is possible to get away with it no matter how
much we insist that they stop (especially as it is difficult to face such cases under the current law). The actual damage caused by this case is not psychologically harmful.
The real damage caused by this case is not only psychological problems, but also the fact that the activities we were doing for the purpose of good will and publicity are
now being hampered.
179. I was told that I was not allowed to draw my own pictures, and that my own pictures, which were very similar to my own design and style, were destroyed, and myearnings decreased. I am also very angry because I feel as if my style, which I have built up over the years, has been taken away from me so easily because someone said
that I drew it myself. In addition, the pictures made in this way are made into works that go against my own ideas (e.g. erotic illustrations or grotesque expressions), which
may give the client a bad image of me.
180. All the data in surface web and deep web is and is being used for some kind of AI.
181. Secondary use of image-to-image illustrations by AI.
182. They were involved in learning data collection without permission, despite the fact that crawling is prohibited in D. ... was used to collect learning data in B, unaware that it
had been republished on a foreign website.
183. I have used an AI illustration generation service to output my own illustrations. It was quite accurate and I felt it was something that could be abused in any number ofways.
184. There was a troll who relentlessly trained the AI on an illustrator's work with the aim of harassing him, and sent him a statement saying that your work is worthless
because it is easy to make such pictures, and I, in a genre related to that, had to make my work private just to be safe.
185. I think everyone has been victimised by copyrighted material on the internet being used for AI learning without permission.
186. Photos of deceased persons (relatives) are being used by an AI-generated system overseas to create photos that look as if they are still alive and to generate obscene
collages. There are no rights complaints and requests for deletion have not been responded to.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
187. Cartoonist. I have staked out background prop designs (e.g. product labels and posters on the street) as material. I have also used it as a reference for images.
188. It's not my own work, but I've seen some messy stuff, like taking other artists' designs without their permission, generating AI with them, harassing them and taking theirmoney.
189. My illustrations were used for i2i (a technology that uses AI to transform - and regenerate - certain images) and used commercially (submitted to a creator support
service).
190. Used as a colour palette for illustration backgrounds
191. AI used to pornographicise and sell images of children
192. That illustrations by well-known illustrators have been incorporated into AI learning without permission and illustrations have been generated. Also, that the illustrations
are being used to defame the person in question.
193. Pictures posted on illustration posting websites were used without permission and used for advertising on social networking sites, such as accepting requests for AI
pictures.
194. Although the official guidelines state that "the use of images from official sources is prohibited", there were people with a lack of morals who posted illustrations that had
clearly used official illustrations and had them run through AI as fan art. What was particularly bad was that the person thought the picture was his or her own, claimingthat it was altered because it had been run through AI and that it was his or her own work.
195. The AI artist is selling them as his own work, claiming rights to all the pictures he has stolen techniques from. The acquaintance has become mentally unstable and iscurrently undergoing counselling.
196. Illustrations that had been posted on illustration submission websites were used directly on the AI, and the illustrations, which were almost identical, were treated as paid
content.
197. We witnessed a malicious incident in which a user of generative AI published an illustration almost identical in design and composition to that of a creator as his own workon a paid support website, and furthermore, as an example, sent an image of the proceeds to the person in question. We have also witnessed a number of other malicious
actions by AI users.
198. My illustrations were loaded into an AI without my permission and regenerated based on them. It was publicly presented as my own work. What is particularly problematicis that they used [my illustration and name] in the illustrations output by the AI. If a client searches for my name and mistakes such AI illustrations for my work, they may
judge my work as 'poor technique' and my work may be reduced.
199. Assets that can learn from images submitted to illustration submission websites and generate similar art styles have been created and uploaded without permission. It isdifficult to take action because the assets have been uploaded to overseas websites. Enquiries have not received a response.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
200. I have seen what appears to be my drawings being used as a base for illustration generation. I am offended by this practice, which appears to be plagiarism, where thefigures are obtained using techniques that I have gained through my time and effort.
201. Although it is not my company, I have seen my colleagues who rely on AI in situations where they should be commissioning illustrators being abandoned by users, but as
the accuracy of AI pictures increases, it will become difficult to distinguish between illustrators and AI pictures, and I think the work will decline I think it will be a decline
in work.
202. The AI is being used for learning without my permission and has already produced unintended output (I did not draw any pornographic work, but a model that learnt mystyle was used to produce pornographic illustrations that were uploaded to the internet).
203. Assistance in preparing texts, drafting speeches and ideas, etc.
204. Unauthorised use of work on a portfolio website for AI training
205. Large datasets for training, e.g. LAION-5B
206. An illustration I drew for a commission was used for AI learning and used as an icon, but I can't pay attention to it because I can't be sure, so I have to cry myself tosleep.
207. It is not clear whether it was used by AI, but once when I posted an illustration I was drawing as a hobby on an international social networking site, it was diverted as an
NFT without my permission.
208. I did not expect this to happen and let my own writing be used for learning. I would say that I was ignorant, but I have mixed feelings about my own work being used forlearning after I had typed it up.
209. I found this on Twitter. No URL as I messaged the person and asked him to delete it... D and Love Live, which was published on Twitter! which I had published on Twitter,
was read by the AI? It was used in almost the same composition. It was a non-monetary work and my day job was as a student, but if it's someone who is working, I wanta legal response because the problem is wider and deeper. But sometimes the person I'm dealing with is overseas, so I guess sometimes the law can't be used...
210. Touch, paint, composition and design of figures.
211. AI illustrations are already inexhaustible on commission sites where AI works are banned. There were AI illustrations that I thought were plagiarised from my own work,
but unlike tracing, I could not say anything because there was no hard evidence.
212. Web scraping with Google Bot/Bing Bot
213. I was working with a company to convert my own illustrations to AI, but this was discontinued after considering the morals of the users, not the AI side. Both thecompany and myself were enjoying the process, but we believe that AI illustrations are ultimately a question of respect and ethics on the part of the people using them.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
214. I usually draw directly on paper and deliver the actual or illustrated data. I have had things I have given online go straight through to AI and used without permission. It isclearly very similar, and even from a third party's point of view, it looks exactly the same. I think it is dangerous for people to use it if they think that if they keep quiet,
they won't be found out.
215. Used for sexually explicit drawings, or spoofed on Twitter because my drawings were being learnt by AI drawings.
216. Brush up on 3D textures Programming
217. A drawing of a person submitted to an illustration submission website a few years ago was converted into an animated style and posted on the website.
218. The illustrations are loaded without permission, the illustrations are sold without permission and you do not receive any royalties.
219. Image generation with Stable Diffusion, text generation with Chat GPT.
220. I'm a model, but they generated a photographic image with my face.
221. Colouring of rough drawings. Illustration of images (for use as background).
222. They have had their illustrations learnt by AI and are being sold for a fee for illustrations that have stolen patterns and other information.
223. The cartoon character you are creating was loaded and a scene was created that looks like a scene from a cartoon.
224. I don't have one, but people around me have been affected and it's a big problem.
225. The AI takes the designs of popular illustrators and creates a number of adult-oriented works. The AI distributes them through a paid service and receives remuneration.
They also tell the authors of the illustrations they have created ("I made a lot of money, thank you", etc.) and encourage them to do so.
226. I don't know if it's used for AI, because it's a messy mixture of illustrations that various artists have spent time and years of skill on...
227. When the AI generation service Mimic was released, a friend of mine tried to use my drawing to generate it. The service was shut down before it could be generated, so it
was safe.
228. It is used to generate textures in 3DCG video production.
229. The work was absorbed without permission.
230. He is a musician. He has been using pseudo-voice technology such as Vocaloid for some time, and has developed and put to practical use a system that incorporates this
into the generation of singing data. He has also utilised AI generation in the video field in the early stages of business, such as rough design and concept sharing.
231. There are too few ways to find out if your work has been used by an AI.
232. Novel writing support and AI illustration generation at AI Novelist.
233. Cartoonist. There are too many examples to list. There are several cases of obvious plagiarism.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
234. I draw illustrations and cartoons as a hobby myself, but fortunately I have not been victimised myself. However, looking at Twitter, I saw that other people have been
affected. According to the information I've heard, so-called "AI artists" are having AI learn the works posted on D (a community website for posting illustrations andmanga) without the author's permission, and are saying that they "drew all the images from scratch" generated by the AI. Although it is only a rumour, I have also heard
information that someone has sold pictures generated by having AI learn a work without the author's permission. If this rumour is really true, it is scary.
235. The design of a character I drew was appropriated.
236. A well-known illustrator's illustrations were created for content where R18 depictions are prohibited, and the original illustrator of that distinctive pattern was annoyed by
the complaints (this is a story about a friend of mine).
237. My work was learnt without my permission and an AI image was generated with a very similar representation to mine without receiving a penny and without any reporting.
238. Many illustrations, including his own work, have been trained by the image-generating AI, which produces highly skilled illustrations for output everywhere.
239. Probably not myself, but a number of people I know have been fed by Illustration AI.
240. Third parties are registered on download sales websites.
241. Work published on the internet was published by others as a work by AI, despite being a close copy of the work published on the internet.
242. I have a friend who had her own picture pattern used by a third party for AI training and then an adult picture was generated.
243. Stable Diffusion (used as teacher data via D and C).
244. AI illustrations that looked very similar to fan art were reported and contacted the management to have them removed.
245. My employer is keen to use AI illustrations, but it is very difficult to get them to understand that this is contrary to the terms of my contract (e.g. not to infringe on third
party rights).
246. It was reproduced without permission on a website called J, where the image could be used as a basis for AI to play with various shapes.
247. Illustrations by favourite authors were used in the AI.
248. It is currently impossible to confirm whether his illustrations have been used without permission. However, he has confirmed that all of his illustrations and illustrations
that are available only to content buyers have been reprinted and published on overseas websites without permission. From this, it can be inferred that site scraping,which is a violation of the terms and conditions of each platform, is being carried out and there is a very high possibility that it is also being used for AI learning.
249. AI processing of speech synthesis software and mixes.
250. My landlord discovered that B had stolen my own work. I actually searched and found that my own work had been used as a learning source. I guessed that he would
probably have taken it from Twitter or D.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
251. Illustrations published on social networking sites were learnt by AI and similar illustrations were published. This would constitute copyright infringement if it were not AI,
but because it is via learning, it has become a difficult issue.
252. not (verb-negating suffix; may indicate question or invitation with rising intonation)
253. Unauthorised illustrations were used to train AI and lost jobs to some people who misused AI.
254. Picture support and idea generation
255. The picture is being learnt without authorisation from illegal reprint sites such as C
256. I work as an illustrator. I have been victimised by the distribution of LoRAs (AI models that reproduce the artist's unique artwork) of my own artwork. As it was done by anoverseas user, it is difficult to act legally and I am crying myself to sleep.
257. He works as a virtual driver using illustrations of characters, which have been output by AI.
258. My work has been reproduced without permission from the dataset source.
259. It has been taken into AI to generate a different one that is very similar, which has been published as a 'better work'.
260. Illustrations posted on the internet have been converted into AI illustrations and sent to them. Have been used for AI training without permission.
261. I design fantasy characters for my work, and I also create characters with special shapes, and I have discovered that some of my followers on social networking sites haveAI-generated characters with the same shape and uploaded them.
262. It is offensive when people AI the works of their favourite authors without their permission and claim that they are their own work.
263. AI-generated artworks are sold using my work as material.
264. It was used as the AI training source image.
265. Although there are no works of their own so far, there are people who have actually been victims of having their illustrations imported and used by AI without permission.
There are people who make money by commercially using illustration-generating AIs based on illustration reprinting websites or AIs that can output the patterns ofspecific artists without permission.
266. Illustrations uploaded on the internet were taken and used without permission by a random collection tool. This is despite stating in their profile that use for AI learning is
prohibited.
267. There is technology in the field of music production that generates voices by sampling them, and there was an uproar when artists whose voices were sampled without
permission had their generated songs taken down. https://blogs.soundmain.net/17418/
268. Graphic design, such as illustration and logo design, was trained and used by AI without permission
269. Images uploaded online were generated by an AI app and used without permission.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
270. There is a group of people who have their drawings loaded and output by AI without their permission, and are displayed and treated as if they were drawn by themselves,
and who do not see anything wrong with this. Some people use it commercially.
271. novel272. There has been an increase in the number of works that are imitative, using illustrations that the AI does not have permission to learn.
273. My illustrations were put through AI and turned into AI illustrations. I still find it very distressing that it was used by AI.
274. My drawings were used for AI training without my permission.
275. I was harassed by a stranger who suddenly loaded my illustrations into the AI and sent me Twitter replies with similar illustrations generated
276. The work of the AI was used by the AI, or the used work was published as a work without permission, etc.
277. I am an illustrator. My illustrations were learned and sold by AI without my permission. When I warned them, they insisted that they only made me learn AI and did not sell
my illustrations directly.
278. My work on the internet is being used for learning without my permission and used as parts of my output.
279. A website has been created to answer customers' questions, and AI is now available to answer them.
280. The source of the illustration image generation by AI has been registered on an image reprint site, and a collage by image generation has been made without permission.
The author has no permission to delete the work, as it is registered on a reprint site and is an overseas site.
281. Although not my own work, I have been given instructions for a portrait to perform at work, using an AI drawing that I believe was created without permission.
282. The work uploaded on social networking sites was used for AI training without permission.
283. Generating AI illustrations using your own drawings.
284. I work in industrial translation and catchphrase writing. My writing has been taken over by AI, and my regular project of about 200,000 a month, which used to help
stabilise my livelihood with similar writing, has been cut. Moreover, other companies' projects have become more complex, with more things I have to do to get the same
remuneration, and I inevitably have to sacrifice more time, effort, energy and health.
285. A work that was clearly very similar to my own work was output by an image-generating AI and spoofed in my name on social networking sites and elsewhere. This has led
to an overall decrease in requests for my work.
286. Drawings created by myself over several days were later loaded and used by the AI.
287. The images on the mirror sites have been used without permission and have been incorporated as part of the information database.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
288. Good example: A 3D model was prepared on the premise of providing a learning model, and was used in a learning data set to help in-vehicle cameras of a public transportcompany detect in-vehicle accidents before they happen. Bad case: A 3D model with a very similar pose, texture, etc. was sold for a fee (less than half the market priceon the company's own website) without the company's knowledge.
289. Works I posted online were used for AI learning without permission, and others claimed that my work was traced to me and that I was a pacifier.
290. Different variations of the original character were created and sold without permission.
291. An example of this is a program that I gave to github that was close to a program modification AI, but was appropriated without my permission as a proposed modification.
292. AI works that significantly matched his own drawings were seen on the internet. The technology has also suffered significant damage.
293. His own illustrations were used for learning and imitated294. We made it clear in the text that we did not want AI to learn, but it was used.
295. My illustrations were learned by the AI without my permission and sold as if they had been created by me.
296. The photos were used as AI photos on dating websites.
297. I have had my work learnt by an AI illustrator without my permission and have had my own remarks made about the output.
298. I have seen AI works submitted to illustration submission websites such as D, where the characters and composition are exactly the same as those drawn by me. I cannot
necessarily judge whether the output was based on my work, but such cases are commonplace in other people's illustrations.
299. It's not used, but there is harassment, saying 'it was probably drawn by an AI anyway'.
300. Measures are being taken to prevent AI from using them, but as a result the opportunities for people to see the work have been drastically reduced.
301. I think it's fair to say that most illustrators are victims when C is used as a learning base in the first place.
302. We have seen cases of people making money from D-Fan Boxes by having their artwork stolen, even though it is not their own work. In addition, the person who
plagiarised the work even politely boasted about it to the person in question.
303. A number of painters I know, though not myself, have been the victims of pattern imitation; they are unable to remain active in the lawless situation promoted by D, Nico
Nico and Twitter to imitate AI patterns.
304. Large numbers of similar pieces of art put on social networking sites are generated.
305. AI for sound correction, synth vocals, etc.
306. In one case study of the use of Microsoft AI, the Tokyo Electric Power Company Power Grid succeeded in significantly reducing the time required to inspect power lines
with its Overhead Power Line Image Diagnosis System, which uses aerial video footage as a learning model. You can also find examples of how AI can transformorganisations of all sizes on Microsoft's customer case studies page. Please take a look.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
307. AI is already being introduced in the creative industries, both internally and externally, for concept art and light presentations.
308. In the future, we expect to see an increase in the number of fraud crimes in which AI-generated images are used to make people believe in a seemingly plausible image.
Not only in this case, but also in other cyber frauds such as fictitious billing and theft of personal information, a trend that continues unabated, we hope that the crime offraud itself will be further severely punished.
309. We saw professional illustrators lose their jobs or stop drawing because of AI.
310. My own work on the internet is used for AI training without my permission.
311. Illustrations were used as material for AI image generation.
312. The illustration was put through ai and made into an icon, probably with no offence to the person in question.
313. Illustrations were used for AI training without permission.
314. Plagiarism of illustration designs.
315. Illustrations were reproduced without permission on the website from which they were collected.
316. I was plagiarised when I posted my work in progress (unfinished work to be completed) on Twitter. I was falsely accused of plagiarism. There is no law to sue for
defamation.
317. Illustrations have been i2i altered and used to defame me and others. I am unable to work because I have been repeatedly slandered by several AI users for complaining
about the damage. Imitation models have also been made under the author's name and I fear that voice models are now being made.
318. You were very saddened and shocked to find out that LoRA data trained on illustrations by an illustrator you admire, but not yourself, has been circulating and that AI
images are being traded on the market.
319. We have seen web commercials using AI synthesised voice narration. One job opportunity for narrators has been destroyed.
320. The AI animated the animation of the 3D model data I produced without my permission.
321. If you post on a social networking site, it's being used to train AI without your permission.
322. I drew fan art of a character and published it online, and the work, which I believe was i2i'd by an image-generating AI, was posted online without my permission.
323. He continued to post his illustrations on illustration submission websites, but his illustrations were used to train other people's AI without his permission. Images withsimilar patterns to their own illustrations were generated, and the AI user was profiting from the plagiarism, so to speak.
324. About six pictures were reproduced without permission on a website called C, a well-known source of training for AI.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
325. There are allegations that audio output from a text-to-speech model published by myself and an acquaintance has been used to train another model without permission.
The creator of the model in question denies the allegation and there is currently no proof of this. The model, which is believed to belong to an acquaintance, has been
made public and is being used by several third parties.
326. Due to the machine learning mechanism, all images (illustrations, photos), texts, etc. uploaded to the internet so far were used without permission.
327. AI technology is already implemented in the paid software used (e.g. Photoshop) and is used in all works
328. A social networking site where he had posted illustrations he had created himself was used for learning.
329. I was working as an illustrator who had never drawn R18 work, for example for children, but AI incorporated it into my work without my permission and made it seem as if I
had drawn R18. The fact that I have never drawn adult material as a direction of my work is a status and has been violated by AI.
330. I witnessed an acquaintance's work being used for AI training and very similar works being posted online.
331. Very uncomfortable and anxious about not knowing when and where they are being used for learning as long as they are active online
332. I believe that my copyrighted work was reproduced without permission on a website called C, which was the source of learning for an automatic image generator called B.
As a result, my work was learned without permission from B.
333. There is some anxiety due to the possibility that one's own work uploaded to social networking sites may be used for AI training without permission. I am afraid that I
cannot clearly determine whether my work has been used by AI or not.
334. Copyrighted material uploaded to the internet is used for AI training without permission.
335. 'I AI illustrate everything! Just send us your image in a reply!" Our illustrations were replied to (and reproduced without permission) and used for illustration generation byan account called
336. My work was made a learning target for the photo-generating AI without my permission.
337. Illustrations reproduced on illegal illustration reproduction websites may have been used for AI training.
338. Painters, whether good or bad, are being victimised. They are not protected by the law, are tired of applying to AI users for removal, and are deprived of time that theyshould be using for work or rest.
339. Although I am not aware of any AI use so far, I have had an illustration I published on the web used in a video without permission, and I was uncomfortable about my work
being used in a way I did not intend. I am concerned that something similar may happen.
340. Copyrighted material uploaded online is being used for AI training without permission.
341. An illustration previously produced on request was used, with the composition and features of the illustration reversed left to right.
342. Several long-drawn illustrations were imported into Ai and sold as new drawings.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
343. We have already seen unauthorised learning and use for a fee.
344. Many companies and sole traders have been affected by the lawlessness of AI's copyright abuse, which has not stopped and there are no regulations to cover up the factthat it has been "used", and the reality is that they are no longer stealing and selling it like a burglar.
345. A user of AI informed them that their own illustrations uploaded to an illustration submission website were used as training data for AI without permission.
346. My work was used and sold as a secondary use in sexual images
347. My signature appeared collage-like.
348. I heard Natsuiro Matsuri's AI voice and I am afraid that my voice will be used too. I am afraid that my voice will also be used.
349. My work is being used as training material for the AI for illustration generation without my permission.
350. original work
351. The company we have contracted with wants to develop its own generation service, and we are in the middle of a fear that the work we have delivered will be re-used forthat study.
352. Cases where their drawings are used by others as material for AI without their permission, resulting in a chimera-like work mixed with other authors' work.
353. Illustrator. His drawings may have been reprinted without permission on C, an overseas reprint site, and used as training data for AI.
354. Theft has happened before, so from now on it will only be stolen with impunity.
355. Unauthorised reproduction of images on the study's original website.
356. Some people send unspecified requests to generate AI illustrations of Grimnotes via D-requests and anonymous subject boxes on Twitter, and the self-proclaimed AI
artists who accept the requests generate AI illustrations using official character images and their own fan art posted on SNS, and post them on D and Twitter. As this is amulti-posting system, there are a large number of accounts of self-proclaimed artists who receive requests, and those who send requests also use discarded accounts ordelete any evidence of requests in order to harass those who draw their own fan art. As a result, even if their work is captured by the AI, they cannot keep up with
reporting and reporting on D.
357. The image posting site D has a service to create a paid fan club that can only be viewed by users who have paid a membership fee, and illustrations posted to that
service were i2i (new images generated based on the image) by AI and posted the next day.
358. Although his own work was not used as training data, he works in the design field and began to hear stories of his work being used as AI material without permission.
359. Illustrations were reproduced by a third party on the international website 'C' and other websites without the author's permission. That site was used for AI data collection(feeding the bait) and can be said to have been used at this point.
360. Work uploaded to D was used as AI training material without permission Unauthorised learning use was made public
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
361. speech synthesis
362. Unauthorised uploads to AI learning websites.
363. Erua bukkake364. It is not known whether it was used for AI, but the Institute of Linguistics has offered permission to use the work for corpus research.
365. None. These questions are unsatisfactory! Isn't that just what they say? Please ask more impartial questions.
366. AI illustrations and novels using AI belisodes.
367. Illustrative data is being promoted for AI training. We have witnessed many cases of illicit profits based on this, regardless of our own projects.
368. The workplace was instructed to draw a picture with reference to an image-generating AI.
369. Output as reference for background and kimono pattern.
370. Illustration generation Illustration used by AI
371. Illustrations (for all ages) drawn as a hobby were learnt and generated by the AI without permission.
372. This is a case study on illustrations. Regarding the IP works of the companies we are involved with, we frequently see a single illustration being run through AI andpublished as an illustration with a different style, or a composite of illustrations being published as a completely new work for a particular character.
373. There is rough stealing, such as submitting a rough draft for work, which is subsequently cancelled and output in AI based on the rough draft.
374. The work of several people, including myself, has been unfairly collected on site D, which I use as a portfolio, and used as a 'learning source' for imitating painting styles.
375. An illustration I had created was loaded into an AI and sold to an illustrator with exactly the same composition.
376. I am a foreigner. I have heard that they have turned my paintings, which are not very famous, over to AI.
377. I have used it for design ideation, etc.
378. The model was distributed on an international AI illustration website after the name was used.
379. Multiple artworks are taken without permission, AI drawings are created, and the drawings are sold and traded without permission, benefiting people who have nothing to
do with it.
380. There have been no instances of actual use that we are aware of. However, if it has been used, it would be difficult to recognise the damage, or it may have already been
done. We believe that this is what makes the current state of AI so worrying.
381. Generation of background material images for games, assistance with JavaScript source code, assistance with idea generation, and shortened proofreading of text during
PR activities.
382. Your work was better when I ran it through AI. And it ate it on its own.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
383. 'What would you do if you were making a story with this kind of setting?' I used it to generate a story and wrote a novel based on it.
384. Illustrations I had worked hard on in the past became AI material on their own.
385. I am a cartoonist and illustrator, and you may be learning about my work on Twitter and d...
386. I have been informed that someone has been loading my work into AI without my permission, creating AI-generated works and publishing them on social networking sites. I
have confirmed this myself.
387. Background generation for videos, advice on music theory.
388. I am a blacksmith and a photo of my own work was used as a background material for an AI illustration
389. Others are using CG drawings authored by me without my permission, making the AI learn to AI-mimic my patterns, and using the output to obtain monetary rewards. I am
concerned because the patterns are so similar that if there is a problem with the picture using that AI, there may be some claims or reputational damage against me in
the future.
390. I got into trouble when a third party tried to take a job on an illustration I had produced for work by having the AI learn the illustration without my permission and thenusing the AI-generated illustration to trick me into accepting the job in my name.
391. AI has been used for some characters' dialogue and other parts of the work
392. Stable Diffusion
393. I am aware that 32 of my works have been reproduced on an unauthorised website called C, which is considered to be one of the sources of training for AI, and that they
are being learned without permission.
394. The name was used and generated without permission.
395. Unauthorised use for AI learning (e.g. illustrations), output of illustrations that imitate patterns, sale of programmes
396. Refined data use of images.
397. design rough398. D and illustrations published on social networking sites were i2i399. AI used my drawings in D
400. My illustrations were used without my permission.
401. Learning my work, distributing AI programmes with my name on them, mass-producing and disseminating works of extreme direction using them. Ignoring removal
requests. Slander and verbal abuse for showing off the images reproduced and the revenue generated from them.
402. Illustrations were AI-processed and posted without permission, and self-created statements were made.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
403. My work is being used as training source data for image output AI 'B' without permission. The work I drew at my workplace (rights belong to the company) is also being
used as training data for the image output AI "XX" without permission.
404. My work was reproduced without permission on a website from which the data for the training dataset was collected, although it is not clear whether it was used formachine learning for AI.
405. AI drawings generated from publicly available screenshots of illustrations for videos drawn at work are posted on social networking sites, etc.
406. Unauthorised learning of illustration works, commercialisation and sale of works similar in composition and design
407. It was used for image to image, where the original picture is output to the AI with the same composition, etc. Since the characters and other elements are basically thesame, this was an infringement of copyright where reliance was acknowledged.
408. Self-written illustrations are used as training data without reporting.
409. A favourite illustrator suffered from people using AI.
410. Saw people who draw pictures similar to their own being victimised.
411. Some of the authors in charge had already made & used Lora in some cases.
412. Generative AI takes in more than 5.8 billion images of image data, and furthermore, as the original images of the process of generation cannot be disclosed, there is no
way to clearly realise that they have been used.
413. An illustrator I know has been victimised.
414. I submit illustrations to an image submission website, which I believe is probably being used because of a massive and unwarranted AI learning that occurred on that site
415. Unauthorised illustrations were studied and confusingly copied.
416. AI-generated illustrations similar to his own work are frequently seen on social networking sites.
417. AI was used to generate pictures in order to output the imaginary image close at hand. The output is for indirect use, such as explaining a world view, and is not directly
used in products.
418. I have never had my work read by AI, but I have been asked for a discount on a theatre flyer design job, saying that AI had done so much for me, so please give me a
discount.
419. D, etc., their drawings were imitated exactly like their own drawings under someone else's name in an account under someone else's name.
420. Generated images that appeared to be based on illustrations I had created were sold for a fee.
421. I am aware that I have benefited from other AI, not just generative AI, so I am not going to make a fuss if my genre is used for learning.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
422. An illustration that I drew with confidence was used for AI training without my permission and published as if it had been drawn by me. I feel that this is a clear violation of
my rights.
423. Learnt and sold without consent.
424. Even if they are not posted on illustration compilation websites, they are sometimes secretly posted on fan boxes where illustrations can be monetised.
425. I have been sent illustrations I posted on social networking sites that were redrawn by an AI.
426. I have had my illustrations altered using AI (output via image to image).
427. Every time you post a picture on the drawing SNS called D, it gets some kind of ranking and a lot of bookmarks. The AI is being used to read and use such works without
permission.
428. A work he had paid for on an illustration submission website called D, where he had not given permission but had his own work studied, was used as training material for
AI without his permission.
429. Background illustration material for artwork.
430. D Submissions have been reproduced without permission by C and used in B's study.
431. It has been used more than once for learning in vain, and has been happily passed on.
432. On several occasions, we have seen familiar illustrators and amateur creators of artwork being used for AI learning without permission by the people who mainly provide
the AI output, and then used for commercial purposes. We have heard stories of some creators being spoofed and the remuneration they would have otherwise earned
going to the AI output people.
433. Although there is no proof that the images have actually been used, rumours have circulated for some time that images registered on stock material sites have beenpurchased for AI learning purposes. If these images are imitated and similar illustrations are generated, even though they have been purchased, it is likely that income will
decrease in the future.
434. I reuse and utilise them in my own work.
435. The work was read by AI and similar illustrations were generated and presented.
436. Unauthorised use of their work.
437. Too many of the creatives around me are victims or frightened that one day they will be too, and there is no time when I don't see AI-related issues on social networking
sites. That's how widespread the damage is.
438. I've had a picture I posted run through AI and replied that it was better than this one.
439. Illustrations were used to feed the AI output 'without permission' -> this is not just a matter of unauthorised use or pattern cracking.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
440. In a recent incident on D, we heard that a tag with XXuser was used by an AI artist who took the picture without permission. This is an outrageous situation, as the work
could be used by any AI and its users who are collecting at random. We hope that restrictions on the use of other people's work as a source for AI will be put in place assoon as possible.
441. My illustrations were processed on i2i.
442. I would like to see guidelines on copyright as soon as possible. Some people are actually saying boldly that they have drawn AI pictures generated using the style offamous illustrators. I want you to set up the right not to be used as AI material without permission, so that the copyright includes the artist's drawing style.
443. The AI model is created from his own illustrations, which are then used to generate AI illustrations.
444. Pictures are used without permission for learning.
445. Illustrations posted on Twitter and D have been reproduced on overseas websites without permission and used as a source of learning.
446. A number of his works were diverted without permission to a website called C, where he stated that Stable Diffusion and other AI-generated services had used them as
training material. In addition, he confirmed that AI generation using his name and rough drafts produced images almost identical to the finished product. Cases have also
been confirmed where paid content has been fraudulently claimed to have been created by me with 00 work.
447. I am an illustrator. A few hours after I drew a character and submitted it to an open competition website, an illustration with a similar composition and background image
was submitted to the same website. I can't judge but AI came to mind.
448. An illustration I posted on ns was used to generate AI illustrations without permission and used commercially. When I protested to the person in question, he scrubbed me
off and ran away.
449. It is impossible to determine that it is your own work due to its quality.
450. Extreme similarity of illustration design
451. Used as a learning resource for AI without permission.
452. We have seen a tweet from G himself, who was responsible for the standing picture, using the standing picture to generate AI and comparing it to the post-generated
picture, which we have urged him to delete.
453. The poses and colours have been used as they are.
454. Of the 5.8 billion images reposted without permission on C, more than a hundred of them are yours, and there's an image-generating AI out there that's been trained
without your permission.
455. Idea generation, technical research
456. A work that had been uploaded to an illustration submission website was used as a learning element without permission.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
457. Although there have been no cases of plagiarism, some of the illustration-generating AI currently available are based on learning from overseas illustration reprinting sites(C). Since several of my works have been reprinted on these sites, I think it is fair to say that they are being used without permission.
458. It is considered a source of learning for illustration.
459. Unauthorised use of copyrighted material for image generation AI
460. Work, fan artwork used by others for AI output without permission.
461. His own illustrations on D were reproduced on the illegal overseas upload site C without authorisation and may have been used to train the image-generating AI B.
462. My industry is in the cartoonist category. I used to draw a secondary character that I used to draw a lot, and the AI user output my own flavour of the picture and used itas the title picture of the fanbox. It seemed like I was selling something in the key. As I had sold well during my doujinshi days, I had been imitated by humans and traced
and sold without my permission. There were also people who made cards of their drawings and sold them without permission. Now, as far as the AI community isconcerned, AI is being used by malicious people. It is very annoying.
463. Third parties who cannot even draw the human form properly have had their AI learn the drawings of artists and painters with high artistic ability without their permission,and have signed their work and made their own statements. There are also many examples of sales and purchases, but most of them are theft of artwork created by third
parties unrelated to the seller, and there is currently no way to stop this.
464. Included as part of the AI learning dataset
465. Currently, they have an account on an illustration submission website where they submit their work, but there are reports of large amounts of images being sucked out by
an external programme to feed AI learning. It is not known how much actual damage has been done.
466. D and Twitter own work is incorporated into AI learning.
467. I once uploaded an illustration I had drawn four years ago to Twitter and found that it had been saved by a stranger, put into AI software and published on another site.
The way I found it was through a leak from a fan.
468. I don't illustrate as a job, but I am very uncomfortable with the possibility of people using my work without my permission.
469. Illustrations that were popular on Twitter were used by AI without permission and stolen as money-making tools on D and Twitter.
470. It is very disturbing to see so many cases of unauthorised use of copyrighted material uploaded on the internet and people blowing it off as if they themselves had drawn
it by hand from scratch. Backgrounds of cartoon works, etc.
471. C, etc., works that have been unfairly reproduced where they were not intended and used as material for learning.
472. Submissions to illustration submission websites have been used by AI as a learning destination.
473. Illustrations posted on D, twitter, etc. may have been used for learning without permission. This includes unauthorised reproductions.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
474. Although not himself, an illustrator he knows has actually been affected.
475. My drawings are distinctive and habitual, both good and bad, and probably won't be used by AI as learning food at the moment, but I think it's only a matter of time, andI've seen cases where even deformed drawings have been used as AI food on their own. It's really...
476. The AI was made to learn several illustrations I had drawn and made money under my name.
477. Illustrations I have drawn.
478. There is an overseas unauthorised reproduction site where the illustration-generating AI that has been a problem recently is being studied, and when I was curious andinvestigated, I found that unauthorised reproductions have been made across multiple sites, from doodles from my early accounts that I have no longer deleted, from myhigh school graduation more than ten years ago, to pictures from my current work account. The sites also include images from commercial magazines that have clearly
been scanned in, and I feel that they are sucking the life out of all those writers without their permission.
479. Since the emergence of AI, it has become harder to produce work.
480. A picture published on Twitter was trained by the AI. (They were reproduced on the website listed as the source of the AI training.)
481. I was offended when someone I know took my picture with AI and generated it without my permission. I have not actually had this happen to me, but from what I see onsocial networking sites, there are many people who have complained about damage related to AI. There are also people who try to make money by having AI learn theirwork without their permission and act as if it were their own work, but I personally feel this is wrong. Creators work hard to create a single work of art, and they arecontinually improving their skills and abilities. To have this taken away in an instant by AI and used by others is an act that violates the rights of creators. This is myprejudice, but I believe that most people who use AI to create artwork have never created it themselves from scratch. I am a student and I want to work in design in the
future. However, since the birth of AI illustration, I am concerned about my future, as I fear it will take away my job. I do not believe that AI advancement in the arts isnecessary. I think it will be an infringement of copyright and an obstacle to creators' rights.
482. I have had an image generated by a stranger using my name.
483. Illustrations were eaten by AI.
484. Grotesque images were processed without permission (images with mental attacks with lots of eyeballs drawn on them).
485. He works as an illustrator and confirms that the data has been reprinted in C, which has been used to create previous study data.
486. My illustrations and cartoons, which were illegally compiled on foreign unauthorised websites, were loaded without permission as learning material and misused for theirbusiness.
487. Background Costume design
488. A rough draft of an illustration posted on the internet was cleaned up by someone else using AI and treated as their own.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
489. Data from a website where I had uploaded my drawings was being used for AI training without my permission.
490. I used to use images of my own work to introduce my artwork, but the images were arranged using AI and I was told that they were originally created by me.
491. Unauthorised use as source data for Stabl ediffusion training.
492. Generation of catchphrases and image illustrations
493. May be used as learning material on unauthorised websites.
494. The name was used without permission and money was exchanged.
495. I am a designer. In the course of creating thumbnails for videos in my day job, I have used AI output of people and fictitious interior decorations as illustrations. As a user,
there are situations where it is difficult or impossible to find and assign creators in time due to a combination of company human resources and deadlines, so we use AI asa shortcut tool to make the content look gorgeous. However, we believe that the output itself should not be used as a monetised product. We use Excel as an aid toconcentrate resources on areas where human power is needed, instead of tapping calculators one by one, so to speak.
496. I was also saddened to see illustrations by illustrators I admire and interact with on social networking sites being used for AI learning.
497. Pictures I have drawn.
498. Cartoonist. Generated images of characters that were created by capturing from the cartoon animation of the cartoon that he was involved in creating were posted on D
under the title of secondary creation. Even though the main subject of the cartoon is not only the picture, in the future it will spoil all kinds of demand for goods and pinups, generate pornography, and people will mistake it for an official image. The clear difference from human derivative works is that by using the official picture itself, it
can be pirated if there is a conflict. The difference is not recognised because derivative works have become commonplace, and many people use them without malice. I
think it would be desirable to regulate the output stage of copyrighted designs that are imitations of copyrighted designs, and on the other hand, for publishers who say it
is OK to output AI (such as Kumamon, for which it is more profitable to give priority to name recognition), it is desirable to develop a form that allows official distributionof models and permission.
499. Photographic works that had been uploaded online were used. This one was a photograph, and the one used was in an illustrative style, but the composition and featuresof the people were retained.
500. Items that are prohibited for commercial use were used for AI training, and money was received by falsely declaring that they had been drawn by the artist himself.
501. Although not my own work, I have seen a number of foreign accounts persistently and repeatedly post AI images leading to the sale of live-action child pornography.
502. Illustrations were used for AI learning.
503. A picture output using AI trained on his own patterns was posted on an illustration-sharing website.
504. Illustrator. As I publish illustrations on the internet, I believe that the illustration generation AI has already learnt on its own through crawling.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
505. I think the AI Novelist collected the novels I had posted online. When I was having it generated for fun, was this a sentence I wrote? I have seen one sentence that was.
506. The work of painters who have contributed so much to my creativity is being fraudulently absorbed by AI and forced out of business.
507. Used for learning without permission and without permission.
508. It was used to train image generation AI without authorisation.
509. Correction of texts
510. On the illustration contribution site D, there was a case in which illustrations with the tag 'Hatsune Miku' were used in batch AI training and the behaviour up to image
generation was automated, and the generated images were uploaded to SNS at a speed that humans are unable to produce at all. As I myself have posted several
illustrations using the Hatsune Miku tag on D, it is believed that my work was used in this case.
511. I have tried to generate new illustrations by voluntarily importing only my own pictures and having them read the features from them, but I think it would be difficult for an
AI to steal the entire technology, and I don't want others to use it easily because I think the details would not matter to someone who treats it carelessly. I don't want to
let other people use it easily.
512. Risk of unknowingly being used to train AI and having the work stolen and sold in its entirety. It is unclear whether they will respond to requests for removal. You can dowhatever you want.
513. I drew a picture with complex poses, but it was saved and AI processed. Naturally, the AI had a lot of suspicious features, such as blow and skin segregation, number offingers, eyes, etc. Only the face was AI collected, the rest of the face was ragged.
514. AI-generated music was used as background music for presentation videos, and AI-generated images were used as materials for event posters and flyer graphics.
515. I saw a work by someone else that looked exactly like it. It was not for commercial use, so there was no malicious intent, but I was simply horrified that this was an exact
copy of that illustration. I felt that even though there was no malicious intent, if I used it, I would be infringing on other people's rights. My personal unique drawing wasused by AI. People who don't draw at all are using AI to make money by using other people's rightful drawings. It is unacceptable that people with no ability are begging
talented people. I will file a lawsuit.
516. It is only copyright infringement if your illustrations are used without permission and presented as if someone else had created them from scratch themselves. A systemthat cannot operate without stealing other people's work is out of the question. How many years of hard work and effort went into making an illustration into a job? It is
unacceptable to have them taken from the side and used as if they were your own work.
517. Cartoon background.
518. I myself have never been used, but I have been harassed by people from abroad who say that my illustrations are ripped off by people from abroad quoting AI's
illustrations. I have a sense of anxiety that my drawings might be eaten by foreign people in the future...
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
519. I don't think it has been used yet, but I am very worried that this situation will continue.
520. I would never use an AI that violates the copyright and all portrait rights of creators around the world, even if it were dead.
521. Intensive learning models of the official cartoon drawings of the cartoons I was in charge of drawing have been created and distributed.
522. Because my work has been uploaded to unauthorised reproduction site A, it has been used illegally by C and other models who collect images from it
523. Even if it is not known, it is certain that anyone who has registered and submitted work in the year 2022 has been a victim of the AI, since it learns from an unauthorised
site called A. All illustration AIs in use today are derivatives of the original model from which they were learnt.
524. To the extent that the Stable Diffusion Web UI environment was built locally and output was tested.
525. When I noticed that results based on material from paid material sites such as Adobe Stock were being distributed on a material site (Illustration AC), which is alsoavailable for free, I feared that the cost of identifying the creators of the material would increase tremendously. I saw an e-book on Amazon that sold pictures of world
landscapes taken by famous photographers in the style of paintings.
526. I became aware of the possibility that my work was being used illegally when I received several actions, including comments from users of image-generating AI, on
illustrations I had posted on B.
527. An acquaintance had software made that read only the pictures of people he knew.
528. Models exist in which the AI is intensively trained only on its own picture. Sometimes the output is the picture itself. Many famous painters have had AI models made, andsome have recently used them to make rough money on pay-per-view websites.
529. They used copyrighted images for which permission had been obtained from the publisher.
530. Data collection from illegally reproduced websites.
531. There was an AI illustration that clearly used my drawing, and when I asked the person who uploaded it, they brushed it off.
532. Can you do it with AI at work, so it's cheaper? They said.
533. I am an illustrator who contributes illustrations to Twitter and B. Once in the past my picture was i2i'd by someone who uses AI, and when I pointed this out to him andasked him to delete it, he refused to do so and the picture remains to this day.
534. A batch of images can be retrieved by entering search words in B to use AI, and not only me but many other people have been affected.
535. Generated material is difficult to search for and identify, and in this context, generative AI should not be used in creative works in the first place.
536. The work is reprinted in B, where Stable Diffusion is the data source, so it is used as training data.
537. The pictures were used for AI training without permission. The learned pictures were then treated as the copyright of the person who made them learn.
538. Copyrighted material uploaded on social networking sites was reproduced without permission (despite being banned), which was then incorporated into the AI.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
539. Illustrations posted on Twitter were loaded into AI without permission and distributed without permission.
540. They used my mugshot instead of my artwork; AI users generate obscene and dignity-destroying illustrations to insult me and send them to my personal email.
541. Erotic drawings of characters that look exactly like our work were published on Fanbox.
542. Painter. The painting subjects I specialise in have not yet received AI inroads at this stage, but that is to say, they are likely to be learnt from now on, and the complexityof the technical logic assumed in such cases is cheap to imagine, motivating programmers and others, and I have already received a reasonable description in a quote bysuch a Chinese person on I am very wary of receiving such quotes on Twitter. Also, I don't want to see it used by others later, so I have taken the initiative and put myown work into the AI myself, and have just researched about 1,000 pieces to see how it would turn out.
543. There is damage to online copyrighted material being used for AI learning without permission. This is supposed to be a social networking site for fun, but even posting
photos has become frightening.
544. My drawings were output via i2i and my work was published without my permission.
545. Although we have not seen it used by others so far, we have witnessed several illustrators' illustrations being damaged by others using them as AI image material without
their permission.
546. The AI user said that he did not use it, and even if he did not use it intentionally, it is possible that it was mixed up, since he used a tool whose source of learning is
unknown. Even if they did not use it intentionally, it is possible that it was mixed in as long as they are using a tool whose source of learning is unknown. But only thedevelopers know that. The problem was not solved because the learning source was a black box. The first problem is that the author's work is being used as much as
he/she wants in a place where it is no longer under the author's control. At present, from the author's point of view, he is convinced by intuition that the work is similar,
but as there is no way to prove it, he received a large amount of slander, such as that he is a whack job and that he is selling a fight.
547. I'm an illustrator and I'm probably being used because there are hundreds of unauthorised reproductions on illegal upload sites that are being used as learning sources.
548. Web creators. As long as you create content that you publish on the web, there is a possibility that it will be used, to a greater or lesser extent, for AI training data.
However, when you publish on the web, you are aware, implicitly or explicitly, that others will use it.
549. Email text used in my own work.
550. I'm worried that it's being used in places I don't know.
551. I'm a cartoonist, but if you look into the training database of the image generation AI, you'll find my own copyrighted images552. Harassment of writers (I earned money based on your drawings! etc.) and their incitement (sorry to hear that learning is not covered by copyright, we're happy to help you
do whatever you want here! etc.) are often seen. Since when did Japan lose respect for writers?
553. It was reprinted in A's study source, B.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
554. Illustration works
555. Not yet by themselves, but people in the same industry are learning the patterns and imitating them in many fields.
556. Illustration and 3DCG
557. Machine-learned illustration works.
558. LoRA in G, animated picture perfect copy.
559. A friend of mine tried to create an AI work focusing on the field in which I am active, and the output was data that would clearly have been learned from my work. (Thefacial parts of the created portraits clearly closely resemble existing works in terms of angles, the way the eyes are drawn, habits, etc.)
560. Illustrations were used as learning material by the AI without permission.
561. Currently, it cannot be used because simply announcing the use of AI undermines trust.
562. We believe that 32 works are reprinted and used on the international websites B and F, respectively, which are considered to be the source of the AI's training.
563. It is synonymous with all creators being victimised when they are being generated and sold from unauthorised learning.
564. We heard that due to the way the generative AI works, artists' work is being collected without their permission. Every artist, without exception, is victimised if they put
their work on the internet. I have heard so many stories of damage from people around me that I myself feel hesitant about putting my work on the internet. I am worried
that if this situation continues, the culture will be destroyed in the future.
565. Unauthorised use of my illustrations on i2i.
566. Harassment using i2i567. The work I published was instantly duplicated by AI and stolen and sold without my permission.
568. His own work (illustrations) was reproduced on an unauthorised reproduction site abroad, which was used as a training source for AI-generating software.
569. There are a number of poses and facial expressions that I'm sure I've included in my drawings, and I can't stop being angry.
570. I have seen many hobby illustrators being harassed on i2i by an AI user called Misato Matsuzaki (now Ferreri), who also threatened to make models and verbally abused
them if they voiced accusations.
571. Illustrations produced by me were i2i output to AI by a third party without permission, and the output images were used commercially.
572. When the request was made, they were presented with an image using NAI and told to "use this as a reference".
573. Chat Generating programmes using GPT.
574. I'm a person who wants to work in illustration and because of AI I can't start working even if I wanted to. And I feel very bad thinking that maybe my work will be includedin the learning data.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ7. please tell us about any examples of actual use of AI in your own work or others (2,612 responses)
What're your AI-induced damage cases? (2,612 answers)
575. I have experience of using AI-based 'image generation' tools, sites and services to actually create AI images. I have also had other people look at them, share theirimpressions and defend them by doing so.
576. Due to contractual reasons, we cannot disclose this information, but we believe that the work itself has already been studied without permission for publication on theinternet.
577. I have never seen it myself, but I was informed via Twitter DM that "your illustration is being used by a Chinese person for AI".
578. Image generation AI is a tool that consists of unauthorised reproduction. As someone whose own work has been reproduced on many unauthorised reproduction sites, I
have no choice but to say that it is being used, but as it is a black box, it is impossible to prove that it is being used. It is impossible to deal with it under the current law.
579. We believe that the majority of past works have been reproduced and used without permission on unauthorised websites such as B, which is considered to be the sourceof training for the Generation AI.
580. A picture published on Twitter was altered without permission by someone else using image generation AI. The use of image generation AI has made it easy for anyone to
make unauthorised alterations, and the existing laws and rules cannot crack down on this. It is like a disaster caused by a mass outbreak of locusts. Laws and regulations
will need to be amended.
581. I am a hobbyist who creates illustrations, and I have confirmed that illustrations I created have been reproduced without permission on the website from which the imagegenerating AI is collected.
582. Illustrations were used and made into something else.
583. Provided without permission (bordering on harassment) by a third party who is not the rights holder, under the guise of comparison and verification with the AI.
584. Sold RVCs using the voices of real minors.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These’re translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
○Legislation 5,657 people are calling for legislation/legislation (e.g. revision of copyright, revision of legislation on digital such as Article 30-4, etc.).
3,907 would like to see learning banned, commercial use regulated and use stopped, and regulations on a par with those in other countries,○Rights 3,115 mentioned rights (copyright, intellectual property rights, human rights, moral rights)
325 respondents were in favour of promoting or conditionally promoting AI.
♦ Other majority opinions Licensing (authorisation) system for use of A I, marking of use of A I by A I marks, etc., establishment of a consultation service,setting of appropriate compensation.
1.
2.
3.

I would like a contact person to deal with cases of infringement of my rights. *This answer multiple.
There is a need for legislation to guarantee the rights of performers. *Many of these responses
We would like to see a rush to improve legislation to prevent authors from having their rights infringed, particularly around learning data. *Many of these responses

1.

We would like to see decent compensation paid to the copyright holders of the material on which the AI output is based. *Many of these responses

2.

I don't think it's right that the results of people's efforts can be taken away without their permission and used by others as much as they want because it's legal if it's AI.

3.

Image-generating AI, for example, is a particular problem, but even if you work hard and are able to create a work that is appreciated, your rights are not protected and you
are used as fodder for other people's profits... It makes striving seem pointless and ridiculous.

4.

While other developed countries are discussing the rules, Japan seems to be getting ahead of itself, perhaps because it is impatient having fallen completely behind in IT.

5.

The act of having generative AI learn and disseminate without permission is an act of taking away individual identity, and while other countries are already concerned about
the risks and are working to regulate it, Japan is far too optimistic. It is too dangerous to remain in a lawless zone, so it is necessary to establish rules in line with those ofother countries.

6.

I want the rights of rights holders to be protected. I want my voice to be heard properly. *Many of these responses

7.

Obligation to indicate that the product is made by AI and prohibition of use of unauthorised training data. *Many of these responses

8.

We have seen countless cases of harassment using image-generating AI. There are many creators who are harassed by image generation AI users when they mention thisissue and are unable to express their opinions openly. I hope that the law will be improved soon and the world will be a place where people can freely publish their works as
before.

9.

Strict regulation is needed. If left unchecked, it will only result in a lawless zone where theft of copyrighted material becomes the norm.

10. We believe that the AI should disclose what it has been trained to learn and obtain agreement on the learning. *Many of these responses
11. AI, such as image generation, should be on an opt-in basis; it should also be mandatory to state that the content is AI-generated.
12. The main reason for this is that the Japanese government is trying to make the Japanese people more vulnerable to the threat of terrorism.
13. There should be a law that licences the use of generative AI and holds users accountable for their use.
14. At the very least, guidelines should be established, etc. If there are no guidelines or regulations regarding the use of AI, only existing creators will be held back.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
15. If they want to promote 'utilisation', they must first thoroughly ensure the safety of AI generation, guarantee the privacy of the learning source and guarantee the property
rights.
16. There are many problems with secondary illustrations that need to be discussed, but I think it would be better to stop the generation of AI that can create realistic photosof realistic women. Although good development may be generated in the future by handling it in the industry, such as companies and firms, the general public may be able
to handle it easily before the law is settled. I think that crimes and other acts that disregard human rights and morality have spread widely through the internet.
17. The current situation is that AI is taking away the brands that many people in the arts have worked hard and built up their skills day by day. While it is recognised as atechnological development when technicians themselves incorporate their own brands into AI and use them, in the current situation, third parties are stealing copyrighted
works and selling the works generated using AI. These are done without consent, and are therefore considered malicious and completely different from technology inheritance.
18. We believe it is important to regulate and distribute guidelines for the use of generative AI. Currently, there are a great many writers and actors who are sickened by thedamage caused by misuse in a lawless state. Specific regulatory measures include mandatory AI-generated product declarations and transparency of datasets. Current
image-generated AI is destroying existing creative culture and violating the human rights of existing authors. Japanese manga anime games and films have many strong fansabroad and are supported by hand-drawn creators and actors. We hope that the day will come when Japanese writers and actors can face their creative activities in a more
physically and mentally healthy way.
19. We want the law to be changed in a way that protects all creators.
20. Stricter penalties for copyright infringement and simplified disclosure requests.
21. I am on the corporate side and work to protect creators, but if we have to fight in a lawless zone with no rules and no policing, relying only on morals and ethics, then thisindustry will one day collapse if it continues as it is. At the very least, we would like to see a ban on "allowing AI to learn other people's work (including photographs) without
permission" and the possibility of legal action.
22. I am a web designer working for a company in my day job and an illustrator on the side. Dumping on the grounds of man-hour reduction - Increased load on workers due tounnecessarily increased labour density as a result of work content being concentrated only on 'creative work and work that generates added value when work-like tasks
are replaced by AI' - Extinction of employment and work itself as a result of being replaced by AI, etc. AI is actively being used. It does not seem to provide significant
benefits in contrast to the disadvantages of introducing AI. My impression, based solely on the trend of image-generating AI, is that the focus is not on "the creation of
new expressions and values never seen before by mankind", but on "how well AI has caught up with or reproduced existing expressions and creations". It is true that wesee many AI-generated works that look beautiful at first glance and contain a tremendous amount of information, but in a sense, these works can be drawn by humans if
they have the time and motivation to do so. If Japan chooses to coexist with AI, it will need to protect employment and rights at the same time.
23. AI technology in itself is a wonderful thing, but in creative works such as painting and music, it is not just an 'extension of human technology' but will lead to a regression
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
of technology.
24. Cultural and performing arts such as video, illustration and music are created by the imagination and hands of human beings. In fact, there is a proliferation of AI works thatare created by learning from other people's works without their permission and claiming that they are their own works, which is almost a violation of copyright. These should
be policed. However, nowadays, AI-generated works can do whatever they want, taking advantage of the fact that there are no specific penalties for AI-generated works.
This has the strong possibility of destroying existing creators and, eventually, young budding creators. I would like to see the creation of a system and law that clearly
separates AI-based creations from those that use them and protects the skills and works of existing and future creators. It is dangerous as it is.
25. Unauthorised learning AI should be thoroughly banned. It is a violation of rights and human rights. Deep fake pornography is already being created. It's not just crime; AI is
not legally regulated.
It is also a technology that, if not done, will be replaced by people. The result will be many more unemployed people, more suicides, more people on welfare, more people
unable to marry, even fewer children, and much fewer people able to pay taxes, even though more taxes will be needed, strangling the people and the country itself.
26. A few months ago, a malicious AI was even created to remove the watermark, which caused controversy on social media. As a creative person, I love the work and style I
create and I want to protect it. In this country, in addition to the current situation described above, unauthorised reproduction of pictures and self-created remarks arerampant and copyright awareness is low, and I don't think AI can be used correctly under such conditions. I think it is essential to mark all AI output.
27. There is potential for mass unemployment in all desk jobs, not just in the arts; AI is more at risk of causing mass unemployment and causing a major recession rather thanenriching people's lives; AI is never just a useful tool, like opportunity; the use of AI should be limited to those with the right ethics and knowledge. It is better to limit its
use to qualified specialists only.
28. We believe that some degree of regulation is necessary. There are already examples of papers being thought by AI and output by humans, and we thought it would be betterto take into account the decline in our ability to think as human beings.
29. Ensure that legislation is in place to prevent cultural decline, infringement of rights and disadvantage to creators.
30. The rights issue depends on our personal aversion, but even if we evaluate the issue objectively, the unauthorised use of works created by domestic personnel by unknown
organisations in other countries and the competition for production by imitators will undoubtedly lead to a flow of assets from the Japanese economy to other countries.
To avoid destabilising the Japanese economy, it is essential to establish a system to stop the azure sky. We believe that prompt legal reform and the creation of an official
AI-generating programme using a legitimate databank and selling it as a legitimate product, and commercial development to outflank unknown organisations in other countries,
is necessary.
31. AI technology is developing rapidly, and I think it can help people in some ways, but I can't help but notice that some people on the human side are stealing the technologythat has been developed by individuals.
32. With regard to AI learning, maintaining the status quo is more desirable for technological progress and attracting companies. However, at the very least, regulations should
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
be imposed on [commercial use of products], such as works generated using works for which learning is banned, works that clearly resemble each other even if the similarity
is not quantified, and [fake products] that spread things that are not true by imitating the appearance and voice of real people.
33. I want the rights of the original rights holders to be properly respected.
34. At least if the learning source is more transparent, a certain level of good manners will naturally emerge.
35. I don't need AI.
36. I am one of those who make a living from illustration art, albeit on a small scale, and I am very concerned about the various problems that the aforementioned imagegenerating AI is currently causing on a daily basis. Currently, it is considered legal for image-generating AI to "learn" to incorporate photos, illustrations, 3D models andother copyrighted material without the author's permission under the guise of research purposes, but the business model of allowing people to use AI-generated AI for amonthly fee has become wildly popular, and the content of the AI-generated assortment of CG illustrations and the like has been sold to the public for a monthly fee.
However, the current situation is that business models that allow people to use AI-generated CG illustrations for a monthly fee have become wildly popular, and works
containing an assortment of AI-generated CG illustrations are flooding the major expressive material e-sales sites such as K and H, where they are treated as products formonetary gain. As a member of the expressive community, I would like to ask you again to sort out the various problems that are currently occurring and to consider
effective regulation.
37. Require extremely strict regulations. Permits, compensation and AI-generated notations. We would like these to be strictly adhered to.
38. The use of images and sounds for fraudulent and unauthorised purposes, as well as for attacking and harassing certain creators, has been abusive and does not help society
at all. In fact, they are confusing people. Please reconsider your stance instead of just promoting it.
39. The generative AI we are talking about is based on unauthorised collection, and it seems strange that you don't make it clear. It claims to be for artists, but is it really? I
can't bring myself to use a plagiarism tool, so please start over with a generative AI made with the prior consent of the artist, I'm sick of continuing to create artwork inanxiety and hearing sad news about the artists I admire.
40. Indication of the source of the AI training. Permission to use the author of the learning material and learning only with authorised works. Legal restrictions on unauthorised
AI learning.
41. Strict regulation of generative AI Establishment of penalties Protection of authors
42. I hope that the current situation where it is possible to import without permission without clarifying the rights of the source of the learning data will be regulated throughlegislation, etc., so that the living artists who are the source of the learning data will be protected. Although the system appears to be convenient at first glance, if existing
pictures and sounds continue to be used as free materials, and if profits can be made from them, I fear that the number of live creators will decrease for a variety of reasons,such as reduced remuneration and orders, impact on motivation to create, and human skills not being developed due to easy use of AI generation, leading to a decline increative culture. I fear that the creative culture will decline.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
43. Legal regulation needed. In particular, database disclosure and opt-outs for the generated ai. In addition, it would be desirable to establish provisions requiring the creatorand the application to pay compensation and other penalties for unauthorised use of their copyrighted material.
44. As long as the AI is in name only and uses vast amounts of text and images scraped from the site, it is difficult not to infringe copyright. This is particularly dangerous withregard to LLMs (Large Language Models) such as ChatGPT, as they have the potential to perpetuate the spread of misinformation.
45. If copyright is applied to AI works, it will be possible to earn the number of works by automatic creation and enforce copyright based on AI works similar to those publishedby third parties, which will lead to a litigious business practice that abuses copyright. If copyright can be used as training data without regard to copyright, then the prompts
for creating with Ai should also be made public so that others can learn from them. Otherwise, it is unequal.
46. I would like to see the development and use of this technology licensed, as it is dangerous to be able to use it in general.
47. I would like to see other people's illustrations not being used without permission when reproducing AI illustrations. In addition, as the appearance of AI-generated fakeimages has caused confusion in society, I think it is necessary to have a cushion, such as registering real names, when using AI-generated applications.
48. I would like you to examine things closely from many angles to protect creators, and to strongly regulate them. At the very least, I would like you to urgently regulate thecurrent situation where the general public can use AI and the developers, of course, but also the general public can easily violate human rights by learning and outputting
creators' works without permission and presenting them as their own. I think the current AI is too specialised in abuse. I think it is necessary to have regulations that give
heavy penalties to those who misuse it.
49. Fundamental question about being okay with using other people's work as a source.
50. Copyright infringement. It is unacceptable to use illustrations without the author's permission or reduction.
51. We would like a law to be made that AI illustrations are published together with the real name or the name of the legal entity.
52. I think the technology is a wonderful evolution, but many creators are suffering because of the lack of morals of those who use it. I would like Japan, which has been highly
regarded overseas along with many creators of anime and manga, to take the initiative in promoting AI regulations to protect creators.
53. I'm an illustrator, but even just unauthorised reproduction, unauthorised use and unauthorised merchandising are not far behind, and I'm calling an even worse form of theft
AI an advancement of the times.
is clearly not right. It's upsetting that a complete stranger is using what we have built up and making money from it without our permission, and it's disgusting that it's being
spread and filled with stolen AI images like the ones we have now. Every day there is always a theft AI image showing up somewhere, which is causing me a lot of mental
stress and is really unacceptable. My creativity is being cut down. Even if I create a piece of work, I don't want to give it to the theft AI when I think that if I give it to theinternet, it will be taken by the theft AI. But if I don't put my work on the internet to appeal to people, I won't get any work. So I have no choice but to give them away, butthen the theft AI eats them up again. We only lose money. This kind of theft should not be allowed, but I am still angry that it has not been dealt with.
54. We would like to see a proper grasp of the facts that have already occurred, such as the dangers of generative AI in general (copyright infringement, human rights violations,Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
misuse in crime), whose current source of learning is unclear, and to align ourselves with other countries to create thorough rules, such as legal regulations.
55. I would rather see humans regulated than AI.
56. Develop firm guidelines and penalties for AI generation.
57. Addressing any abuse issues
58. It is a technology that is too early for mankind, it would have been better if it was a clean AI or something a little more useful for people, but I think that to some extent it
needs to be controlled by law. I am dismayed that the laws that protect living people prioritise inorganic AI for politicians' own convenience, because what is circulating now
is only technology that collects and imitates human output as data.
59. Prohibits, in principle, the use of AI-generated works on objects for which money is involved in their use, and requires AI-generated works to display a statement in theimage describing everyone who has used them.
60. The AI illustration community, in particular, is already bringing the efforts of illustrators who have worked hard up to now to nothing. In the world of painting, people who
can't draw should not be valued and earn more money than those who can.
61. Monetisation with AI pictures has become more prominent. Many people have already earned more than 10 million yen by imitating popular patterns and generating an
overwhelming amount of artwork. If unauthorised learning is not allowed for commercial use and an AI mark is not attached, there will certainly be no more decent creatorsin the future.
62. I would like to see more listening and other research in various areas. It's still not enough at all.
63. I know that it is a useful function, but the fact that the techniques developed up to now are being stolen and misused by a segment of the population with no morals and nointerest in art and culture reduces their motivation for creative activities and leads to a decline in culture, so I would like a legal system and crackdown that gives the artists
the upper hand.
64. For the past six months, creators have been having their work exploited by AI, and there have been suicides. If this continues, the industry will only grow weary, so I think
regulation is absolutely necessary: I would like to see legislation such as making it mandatory for AI-generated works to be watermarked (penalties for removing it), requiring
the source of the learning to be presented, etc.
65. For individual and freelance creators, infringement by AI is no small matter. We ask for legislation as soon as possible.
66. It is regrettable that illustrations are used to learn AI and then presented as the picture of the person who created the AI output, which raises the question of whether
there are any copyright issues. We hope that there will be a mechanism in place to ensure that the rights to AI works are protected, as well as the rights to the work thatwas learned to create the work. . Is it possible to have copyright protection for human-drawn works addressed in a way that can be adapted to AI works?
67. I believe that the accuracy of deepfakes has increased, making it even more difficult to determine whether information is correct or incorrect. I think that the threshold for
exploitation has been lowered, not only for pornography, and that it is now easier to exploit with a high degree of accuracy.
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
68. Please do not underestimate technology.
69. AI should not be able to touch creative things that are meant to be done by human hands.
70. In a world where generation ai is good, the production speed of all content will increase and Japan will be flooded with content, supply will outstrip demand, content will not
sell, the entertainment industry will collapse and unemployment will abound. And entertainment jobs become unprofitable. Only low-quality products produced by individuals
will be available. And films, with the exception of some Japanese films,
The game industry will disappear and furthermore, the companies and industries involved in it will collapse. Personally, I would like ai technology to be used in fields such as
crime prevention and car accident prevention.
71. Looking at the words and actions of existing AI users, it is not possible to operate with the expectation of sexual goodness or self-cleansing, so we would like to see thespread of AI limited to healthy AI in the form of AI singing and talking software with characters in general circulation, which is created by learning data only from those whowish to use it and can individually restrict unwanted use. We would like to see the spread of this type of AI.
72. I think the current copyright law is sufficient, because creative activity itself can be done with or without AI. In fact, I think that better works will be created by using AI.
However, I believe that AI will be used for various things in the future and more people will lose their jobs, so we need to think about how to follow up on this at the sametime.
73. AI art products that appear to be based on child pornography images are flooding the internet. Please do not be misled by voices saying that AI art must be promoted
urgently or we will be left behind in the world, but rather have a careful discussion on the basis of consensus and human rights.
74. We believe that AI has the potential to enable more diverse and free expression. However, we feel that many people are already misusing AI to imitate other people's works
and use them against the will of copyright holders.
75. There should be restrictions and terms and conditions for users rather than making the functionality and technology of the AI an issue.
76. The law on AI works should be improved, as there are so many AI works that abuse copyright law.
77. There are people who take advantage of the current situation where individuals cannot be identified as AI-created/AI-using creations unless they say so themselves (i.e.
they cannot be found out if they keep quiet), to gain money and publicity illegally. There are companies and creators whose rights are being infringed by this. One creator
told the contributor of a digital illustration (which was clearly visible to a third party that the creator's one digital illustration work had been appropriated almost verbatim,
with some modification by the AI throughout) that was allegedly AI learned and output without his permission. I asked the contributor to remove the post, saying that I
wanted him to stop learning my illustrations without my permission, but he denied having the AI learning and output in a half-mocking way to the creators. You can say
anything you want with just your mouth and written communication. I also think that the humanity of those dealing with AI should be questioned from now on. I have been
distrustful of the use of AI ever since I saw some people selfishly misusing it. I cannot dispel that distrust, even for those who are using it appropriately. I think it's a great
development of technology, but there are too many unethical people who are not ethical enough to deal with it at present I saw a suggestion on social networking sites to
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
make the use of AI a qualification system. Looking at the current AI-related troubles, I am generally in favour of a qualification system.
78. AI technology itself is a wonderful thing. Many people misuse it. It can remain widely available. I would like to see more thought put into the punishment for misuse.
79. In addition to the generally discussed issue of copyright, there is also a concern that if a foreign-made AI learns a manga or illustration without authorisation, and as a result
it is exposed as child pornography in a case overseas, your work may be included as the source of the learning, and you may be charged with a crime even if there is no
child victim. This is a concern. We would like you to be aware that the benefits of image generation AI are outweighed by all possible risks.
80. AI is a new, secondary, primary creation from what is primary (humans and nature). Already, not only art (pictures and animation), but also music (voices, songs and sounds),
technology (machines
and games) and other advances that can be generated and moved. There is nothing to worry about there. but humans are using it and growing it, AI itself is also learningand people are getting products, now. (You might call it the 'AI industry'.) How to deal with AI, with the knowledge of those actually involved (creators and producers rather
than users), countries need to respond, and at the same time, create rules (sometimes regulations...) to be followed. At the same time, they should create rules (andsometimes regulations) to be followed, update them, and work to make them part of people's normal perceptions.
81. The act of profiting from AI should be prohibited by law or ordinance. *Many of these responses
82. Learning to use other people's illustrations without their permission to generate money and make a profit should be banned!
83. We hope that the law will be enacted as soon as possible. *Many of these responses
84. Don't steal our work...

85. We would like to see the output of illustrations of the same quality as the studied illustrations added to the guidelines as an example of harm to unjustified interests under
Article 30-4 of the copyright. (i.e. learning Ghibli Anime and producing Ghibli Anime-style backgrounds and figures, or learning Bishojo illustrations and outputting Bishojo
illustrations). Also, as suggested by the EU, a notation of the fact that it is an AI-generated product and a notation of the AI used when it was generated. Adobe Firefly andNvidia's Picasso are planning to develop opt-in services for design, photography and illustration, and we hope that Japan will not become Galapagos in line with global
standards. We would like to see guidelines for market development to ensure transparency of the same quality.
86. Generated AI with a mixture of different images is very dangerous. I sincerely despair if my work is used for abuse without my knowledge. I have not drawn my illustrations
and artwork to hurt anyone. I would rather disappear from this world than be used as a tool to hurt someone. That's how painful it is. And if someone else is using my
illustrations to make money and take my place, I feel as if I am being told that I have no reason to exist in this world. Am I not allowed to exist? How can my illustrations
and artwork be someone else's when they belong to me? I feel like, please don't steal my works. I also want you to stop using the AI to hurt or abuse people, so I want you
to regulate it. Generative AI is not necessary for creators to be human.
87. As long as the damage caused by misuse outweighs the benefits, including crime, rights violations and harassment, we believe that comprehensive regulations need to be
put in place. There is Glaze, a tool used by artists who don't want their work to be trained by AI, which inhibits learning, but they either don't realise how many people are
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
trying to break through it, or they don't even think this is a problem. The problems related to generative AI are not limited to the arts, but are serious issues that affect thehuman rights of all human beings, but I am very concerned that many people, especially those who are indifferent to or dismissive of the arts, seem to underestimate ordeliberately ignore the risks. It is difficult to gain trust and cooperation for AI from the learning source, which is necessary for AI, due to the unethical behaviour of users
and some engineering lawyers, such as ignoring the problems of generated AI, unethical use, unnecessarily derogatory remarks, second-guessing the damage and insulting
the victims of generated AI by celebrities, etc. I believe that it is difficult to get the trust and cooperation for AI from the learning source, which is necessary for AI. Thatmay be why they are trying to force through the promotion by trying to deal with the copyright infringement issue by making the current copyright system known. Some
radical engineers ridicule the raising of ethical and human rights issues as obstructing technological development as anti-intelligence, but people who do not hesitate orquestion the fact that human rights are ignored and human dignity is trampled upon are not qualified to talk about technological development or intelligence. I would likethem to at least be aware that they are not even remotely qualified to talk about technological development and intelligence. If the current disaster means anything forthe emergence of generative AI, it is that people who are indifferent to or disregard the rights of others and who are not willing to step on others' toes are the ones who
are the ones who will be the most likely to be affected.
The only thing is to make visible those who have no hesitation, no doubts, or are trying not to see those atrocities. Still ridiculing the appeals of those who have sufferedreal harm and those who raise the issue as a feeling, etc.
There are human beings, but there is no reason to disrespect the feelings of the victims, and we want people to realise that the various issues related to generative AI are
human rights issues, not individual emotional issues.

88. Generative AI should be banned from incorporating personal works without permission; AI proponents really do too much as they say that the current unauthorised learningof generative AI is legal on the grounds of Article 30-4 of the Copyright Act. If the situation continues where it is legal for third parties to monetise their work by having
their work fed to AI without their permission, culture will decline. When the current law was enacted, the birth of generative AI as we know it today was not envisaged, so
we believe that generative AI should not be applied to Article 30-4 of the Copyright Act in light of the disadvantages to creators that generative AI can cause. As in China
and other countries, generated AI should be an opt-in system. With an opt-out system, it is impossible to identify and apply for the exclusion of all illustrations, including
those that have been reproduced without permission.
89. To be honest, I'm not comfortable with the idea of turning everything over to AI. We want to do the best we can on our own.
90. I think AI learning is a great technology, but I hope that regulations and penalties will be set up as soon as possible for those who are making money by absorbing theillustrations of those who do not want AI learning to happen without their permission.
91. Not only are the authors' important works being learned and used without their permission, but real fake pornography is also rampant, putting children at risk, and we hopethat this situation will be regulated by a straightforward law.
92. It is said that learning is legal and copyright infringement can be dealt with under current law, but it is not possible to sue as long as the database of the generated AI is a
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
black box and cannot be referenced. Also, learning
Generative AI is not supposed to be legal at the point in time, either. We want to see the immediate regulation of the system and the safety of the public as a top priority.
We continue to suffer human rights violations.

93. Currently generated AI is being reproduced and used for copyrighted material without permission. Furthermore, according to Article 30-4, the purpose of AI illustrations on
Twitter are for research purposes only, not for the enjoyment of thoughts and feelings, but AI illustrations on Twitter are liked and RTed, and comments such as 'cute' and'beautiful' are also seen in many cases. Doesn't this constitute emotional enjoyment? AI is supposed to support mankind in the first place, but what is technological progress
when it is usurping work and the meaning of life from mankind? *Many of these responses
94. With the situation changing day by day, we believe that there is no longer any room for utilisation for this type of generative AI. We have had at least six months or so oftime to consider and discuss it, but we have only tried to make it acceptable for abuse or for someone who is not some creator to snatch our artifacts.
95. It is not possible to be creative with peace of mind under current Japanese law, where other people's technology, portrait rights and copyrights are easily exploited.
96. Sharing of unethical cases against real children using generative AI On 26 May recently, on B booth, a production sales website operated by company B, a user named "852stories" used a generative AI to produce voice conversion data called "Real Shota Voice Changer" using the voices of real underage boys as training material for thegenerative AI, which was confirmed to be sold at a high price of 30,000 yen. The user produced a voice conversion data called "Real Shota Voice Voice Changer" using thevoices of real underage boys as learning material for the AI, and we confirmed that it was being sold for the high price of 30,000 yen. (The product description on the sales
website was later changed to "boy-style" to avoid the involvement of real children.) The idea is that anyone can use the human voice learnt by the AI (in this case, thevoice of the child in question sampled as the learning source) to speak as they wish, on any subject, as if it were their own. The service is often used to generate AI. This
service has often dealt with infringing products using AI, and has avoided setting strict terms and conditions for works using AI, perhaps in order to prioritise the pursuit ofprofit from sales, only withdrawing products whenever there is an uproar. We believe that legal regulations, including effective penalties, are urgently needed not only forusers of AI, but also for businesses that handle AI works. Recently, a similar product that intensively learnt the voice of a specific professional voice actor (J) was sold on
the same website without the voice actor's permission. According to the explanation of the user of the product, the data used to learn the voice of the voice of a relative'schild was used in the product.
voices were used and parental consent was obtained, but we feel that this is a fundamental and ethical issue, not only for children, but also for adults and society as awhole. We will be happy to share the information with you. Thank you in advance.

97. Amendment of Article 30-4 of the Copyright Act, opt-in for generated AI in general; mandatory marking of AI products as AI and penalties.
98. I want the law to be in place as soon as possible, and if there is a possibility of losing my job, I want to know about it as soon as possible.
99. I want you to stop ignoring the people in the creative industries who are experiencing mental distress and those who are engaged in such activities. I don't want to live insuch a country where security is deteriorating and I don't want to leave behind the next generation. I want you to take a hard look at the concerns about Japanese copyrightDuplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
from abroad. Japan's reputation in the creative industries, not only in Japan but also abroad, is declining day by day. I want Japan to show its stance as a nation governedby the rule of law.
100. Initially, I was hopeful that if we could disseminate the generative AI to children who reproduce without permission, such problems would decrease, but I despaired when I
found out about the content data used. It feels very blasphemous, as if it is defacing something beautiful that has already been completed or someone's memories. At thevery least, I would like to see a form of image data that can be used only after permission has been obtained from the owner of the image data.
101. Anyway, the current 'picture generation by AI' seems to be a situation where 'the person who drew the picture steals and eats it up, and only the person using the AI isenjoying themselves and infringing on their rights'. I would like to see the protection of the rights of those who use the AI as material and heavy penalties for those who
misuse it. I don't draw pictures as my job, but it pains me to see those 'people on the side being preyed upon'.
102. 'AI-generated technology, not AI technology in general,' is a technology that can cause significant disruption and value loss in the exchange of information, even for nonexperts. To deal with this in the most productive and efficient way, we believe that there should be reasonable qualifications and legally enforceable rules for those who
deal with it.
103. I am a hobbyist who creates illustrations and comics. In the process of creating, I sometimes use digital materials (processing filters, 3D models, etc.). Many of theseguidelines strictly prohibit the sale of altered materials or secondary distribution. Currently, there is a serious problem of creative works containing such material data being
reprinted without permission and laundered as learning 'material' for generative AI.
104. Most of the AI currently in circulation arbitrarily disregards even the basic morals of creativity, such as "use in accordance with guidelines", and exploits the work of others,
which is something that cannot be tolerated. I also feel a strong resentment towards those who have lost respect for individual creativity, voice, appearance and any otherartifact or property, which they define as 'fodder' or the like. This is nothing short of a composition that is far removed from the principles of creation and cultural transmission.
105. Make AI notation mandatory and disclosure of the source dataset of the study mandatory.
106. Legislation.
107. Everything from private to sensitive material is being treated as free material without permission, and deepfakes are causing damage. We would like to ask for stern measures
to be taken. We are also concerned that if we do not take a proper attitude towards unauthorised use of copyrighted material by AI, there will be a possibility of blocking
access to information from Japan, and of Japanese creators who are working legitimately being subjected to unspeakable slander and labels.
108. We believe that AI technology itself is a wonderful thing and has the potential to enrich our lives. However, even if one tries to use AI "correctly", existing AI tools are still
not fully fit for purpose, as they are based on unauthorised collection and use.
I have the impression that many people use the data or are not aware of it or do not feel it is a problem. We would like the Japanese Government to consider drawing up
guidelines for awareness of the problems and appropriate use of the data, with the involvement of creators and other parties involved (although we believe that all parties
are involved as the data may be taken in or imitated).
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
109. I think there will need to be a law against people who infringe copyright, using AI that automatically collects and learns.
110. It would be better to implement regulations. It will only be used for abuse.
111. A common misconception of generative AI is that machine learning for AI, which generates the same format as training data, is material collection rather than learning. The
original data is transformed, synthesised and generated
From. There is a big problem with doing that with copyrighted material without permission. AI engineers also say that there is no copyright problem because what is in the
AI is statistical data, not copyrighted data, but the generative AI uses prompts to search for data and then synthesises it, so what it is doing is the same as synthesising
images from a Google search. I think the major problem is that the opaque mechanism of AI is conveniently misrepresented and promoted without understanding thatgenerative AI is in fact just a material collection & search & synthesis programme.
112. It is remarkable that people with no morals are stealing the rights of others and mass-producing obscene images for commercial purposes. I feel that legislation is needed
as soon as possible. Overseas, artists' rights are being protected quickly, but Japan is lagging behind.
113. Damage estimates for the introduction of AI in artistic genres, which ignore rights relations as they currently exist, are too lenient.
114. The advantage of AI is that it has no human common sense or preconceptions, so we hope that it will not be regulated or otherwise impeded in its development.
115. I do not agree with the current situation where the emphasis is only on technology and the rights and dignity of the underlying creators are unfairly exploited; it would begood if AI could create works from scratch that surpass human works, but at present AI generation is not possible without consuming large amounts of human technology.
A system that does not give anything back to human technology will deprive humans of technology, rights and the future, and as a result, the works that AI learns will
disappear in the future.
116. Obligation to clearly state AI generation required. *Many of these responses
117. Clearly state the source of learning and prohibit the use of generated AI (especially image-generating AI) for harassment, etc.
118. If it is in the creative field, it can be settled into a rights-related discussion, but the root of the problem is that it is a technology that enables human rights violations thatexcels in 'disguise', 'concealment' and 'dissemination'. The unreasonable structure for creators is a structure that leads directly to social disruption. I am concerned about
the lack of awareness among politicians.
119. AI Illustration is playing with human drawings as toys, I am fed up with it, human identity and effort should not be taken away so easily, I want AI Illustration to be thoroughly
regulated, I demand a ban on the posting of AI Illustration in Japan and a ban on the use of image-generating AI.
120. There are concerns about nuisance, rights infringement and crime caused by AI. It is difficult to crack down on it under the current law, and the general public's awarenessof rights to copyrighted works is low, so it is in a state of chaos. I would like Japan to be a cultural country where the rights of copyrighted works and artworks are protected.
121. We wish to eradicate AI-generated child pornography. *Many of these responses
122. I would like to see the country take immediate action, as I believe that Japan, with its current laws, could be impeached, litigated or isolated internationally, when the theft
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
in generative AI and data sets containing personal data, such as photo data of people in foreign countries, becomes a global problem.
123. It is difficult to consider the problem of Ai in a single category because the content of Ai varies, but we think that the law should be improved to stop the situation where
the source of learning is unclear and a large number of AI products and photographs of real people are used without permission, the copyright of the original products isguaranteed, and AI products spread information with malicious intent. We believe that the law should be amended to require the display of the products and the informationof their creators in order to stop the situation where information can be spread maliciously by the generated AI. If not, this technology could cause a lot of problems as an
aid to crime. We would like to see the State take action to address this issue.
124. The development of technology is important, but at the same time it is important to ensure that personal data, copyright and other rights used for learning are protected
and not exploited, and to look at issues and voices of opposition in other countries.
Please make it obligatory for items made with Ai to be marked with Ai and the source of the study. As it is, Ai cannot be trusted. And above all, please don't let Ai learn
without permission. Please don't let them learn without permission.
125. Please strengthen regulations on a par with those in other countries.
126. Clarification is needed on who owns the original data that AI uses for training and whether selling works generated from data collected for information for research constitutes
copyright infringement.
127. The State should be made aware of the problems with the data models of image-generating AI currently available. Also, AI-generated content should be obliged to statethat it is made by AI and penalties should be imposed for failing to do so.
128. As a creator, I think that technological developments like AI are desirable, but there are too many accompanying problems (copyright and other rights, harassment ofcreators who claim their rights, etc.). I don't want anyone to suffer, and I myself don't want to see anyone suffering.
129. I am a web designer. I would like to see a watermark on the generated AI output as soon as possible so that it can be easily identified as 'AI output'. Personally, I believethat machine learning output of images, text and audio should be an opt-in system. The assumption is that data collected for research purposes can be used for commercial
purposes, which is not right.
130. I draw pictures using everything I have experienced so far, and I don't feel good when people use my work without my permission. I can't stand it if it's a collage, but I can't
stand it if it's used for a joke.
131. al created should be al sign printed, and should not be able to be bought and sold illegally as it is design plagiarism. al It is full of child pornography and has been outlawed.
*Many of these responses
132. Unauthorised use of audio and images is not allowed. The possibility and reality of use by strangers is increasing and the problem needs to be made visible and discussed
by the State.
133. I don't know how to respond when technology or achievements are stolen (I don't know where to complain to, so I think I'll have to appeal to all the places I can think of) I
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
want laws and guidelines as soon as possible. I would like the state to pay more attention to technology and culture.
134. Individual efforts must not be allowed to be side-stepped.
135. AI should be firmly regulated! It must not be used!
136. I feel that image-generating AI is a threat. Currently, AI users' moral behaviour is too low, and I feel that creators' rights are being infringed, for example, by imitating andusing illustration patterns and methods of expression. Illustration patterns and video expression methods have been acquired by creators over a long period of time in theirlives, and the current state of AI seems to disregard their efforts. Although there may be aspects that create possibilities for the development of illustrations, images andother forms of expression, if new expressions continue to be immediately imitated, it will be rather
I fear that it will go in a direction that will hinder development. As an entertainment professional myself, I do not want AI to take away my job, nor do I want to be in asituation where I am forced to use AI myself and infringe on someone else's rights due to the policies of my organisation. We know that we cannot stop the development oftechnology, and even though it is difficult to regulate its use (and we really don't like to see it... but that is too emotional), we hope that legal developments such as requiring
the disclosure of training data, or setting some restrictions on the use of training data, will help to protect creators' rights. We hope that the protection of creators' rights
can be achieved through legal measures, such as requiring the disclosure of learning data and setting some restrictions on the use of learning data.
137. Currently, the majority of unauthorised learning of other people's work on platforms such as C G is probably being sold. In addition, the source of the training is different
from the source of the generated AI.
Data from all over the world is used, including legal sites and actual child pornography. Promoting this is like promoting illegal websites, and we believe it is very dishonest.
We believe that there should be rules regarding generated AI, such as labelling the output as AI, registering real names when using AI, and asking for permission from theauthor when learning AI. If this is used for celebrities, children, etc., it could have an impact on the financial markets, which has actually happened, and could be used forchild pornography-related crimes in the future, and there is also the drawback that the original rights holders and copyrighted material are difficult to identify because it issynthesised from all kinds of data. Japan is far behind in these discussions, and overseas, it has been used for fraud in China and has even led to lawsuits in the USA andother countries. Currently, anyone can use AI, but this is more a state of lawlessness than legality. At the very least, I would like to see an orderly state of affairs.
138. The illustration industry has been in hell for the past six months. Cartoonists and musicians are actively using illustration-generating AI to cut costs, saying that they are
not in trouble. This is despite the fact that the source of the learning includes illegal reprint sites from abroad, child pornography, medical and cadaver images. And thecartoonist MP who tried to eradicate Manga Village said: 'All AI learning is legal. Currently AI doesn't need legal regulation", "No famous people are against it, so it's not a
problem", and "Japan has a chance to win", and continues to turn a blind eye to the damage caused by illustrations even today. The former operator of Manga Village alsolaughed at him, calling him a "double standard", which can only be described as true. Every day on the internet, there are terrible slurs flying around, such as "Let them be
eliminated", "It's the idiot's own fault for trying to make a living from drawing", "Stupid antinomianism", "Thank you for all your hard work so far for free AI fodder", "Thosemaking noise are at the bottom, so we can weed them out", etc. However, I feel that publishers, animation companies and the games industry are not against AI, but rather
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
actively want to use it, as if they think that as long as there is a learning source, the illustrators themselves are unnecessary. I even feel despair at the fact that there areno companies that stand on the side of creators, and every day is hard.
139. Please don't promote something that is full of problems and whose regulation is already being discussed in other countries. Generative AI has only disadvantages.
140. Every artist is a newcomer at first, and there are times when you get work as a favour. You can grow through that process. However, because of low-cost, miscellaneous
collages like AI that ignore the copyrights of other creators, those opportunities are disappearing, and there is actually a decrease in work abroad. If AI comes into play, it
will be even more difficult to train artists, and there will be even fewer innovative artists. I think it is important for the future of Japanese performing arts that AI is completely
regulated, rather than adopted on its merits.
141. Human morality has not kept pace with technological developments.
142. I am an illustrator. There are those who call themselves neutral, taking the precautionary step that "the technology" is "great". There are those who say things like, "We'relooking for ways to utilise it." But I don't think, nor have I seen, any concrete positive use made of the underlying datasets of generative AI since the rights issues wereraised. The AI images that have been pointed out recently are all deep fakes, or images that are output by averaging the style and composition of existing creators, and as
someone who actually deals with images and illustrations at work, I am concerned that along with unauthorised use, there is a risk of rights infringement.
The current situation is that "use of AI is unthinkable", "I doubt the morals of those who use AI", and "some contracts stipulate non-use of AI, which is a disadvantage
because it increases the time and effort of fact-checking compared to before the advent of AI". Above all, despite the fact that so many creators claim to want to protect
the rights of their works, we see too many comments from technicians who think it is okay to take away the rights on the grounds of 'technological development'. They talkabout the development of technology, but what do they want to achieve by using rights and ethics as a stepping stone, turning their eyes away from the reality that misuse
is more noticeable than good examples of use and is becoming a daily problem? Are we not mistaking the ends for the means? The fact that there has never been any fairdiscussion in the public arena in the first place makes me feel sorrow, resignation, sadness and anger.
143. AI products infringe on someone's copyright and portrait rights, take away the work of the original creator of the material, and can be used in ways that the rights-holder
does not want, such as impersonation and fraud. Before considering active use, legal reform and countermeasures against misuse should be considered first.
144. I mainly draw illustrations of exploits such as deepfakes. What I thought was a definite no-no was the fact that a number of people created and distributed AI models of
people who had expressed their dislike of AI learning, without any apology. (Of course, there have also been cases where people have beaten those who have voiced theirdislike of it, and even harassed them by creating and distributing their own AI models.) And then there is the fact that the original training material was found to besynthetically generated images from very unethical data, such as actual child pornography, injuries and corpses. And because we realised that this was not a new technology
to create something new, but something that could be pirated at a very fast pace, and would be very damaging to the value of the original. Realistic AI child pornography
based on real child pornography is also a violation of human rights. Many people have responded to this question! and put them up on social networking sites. The
current situation is very dangerous because it is easy to create deep fakes and it is difficult to prove even if people who are really suffering provide evidence. The generated
Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapanQ8. what do you think about AI and what do you want from the government (14,500 responses)
What do you think about AI and what do you request from the government?
AI can be distributed all over the world and can be easily created locally, so it is not possible to deal with it by individual response alone, as has been the case so far. The
hurdle to generate and misuse AI has dropped tremendously, and even if you alert people to the fact that learning itself is legal, they will not listen to you. So even if we
can't regulate the technology itself, I think we can regulate the legality of the products against those who use lawlessness as a shield. Please take action as soon as possible.
We hope that you will reconsider what copyright and human rights are for.
145. I draw pictures, but I do a lot of checking, so I often have more work to do with AI, but I feel that it is a loss for the more technically skilled workers. I think it is a good tool if used
well, so I would like to see better regulations.

146. I would like to see the establishment of laws and regulations to protect the rights and future of creators and human rights such as personal information as soon as possible, in linewith the current transitional period in the development of AI technology. I would like to see Japan become a world leader not only in AI technology, but also in literacy. I hope that
we will become a world leader not only in AI technology but also in literacy.

147. First, unauthorised learning should be banned and all but clean database AI should be illegal. It would be more efficient if it were used as a supplement to work, but at present, itcannot be used commercially due to the risk of lawsuits and ethical issues such as copyright infringement and child pornography images being included in the database. First,
unauthorised learning should be banned, and AI other than clean database AI should be illegal.

Duplicate responses have been omitted and specific company names are given in alphabetical characters. These're translated by Deepl.
©ArtsWorkersJapan

Overview

Official Name

Arts Workers Japan Association

President

Megumi Morisaki (actor)

Established9/2021

Address

3-6-7-11F Kita-Aoyama, Minato-ku, Tokyo

Affiliations

Nationwide Centre of Arts Workers’ Accident Compensation Insurance(Authorized by Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare)

Unauthorized use and diversion prohibited. If use the surveyed results, contact to this form (h;ps://artsworkers.jp/en/)