AI copies Chicago area artist’s work and forges his signature—now what?

Wheaton illustrator Jason Seiler discovered an AI-generated caricature circulating online that mimicked his distinctive artistic style and even included his forged signature. The case highlights the growing legal challenges artists face as AI tools can now replicate years of creative work in minutes, potentially threatening their livelihoods while existing copyright laws struggle to keep pace.

What happened: A fan alerted Seiler to an AI-created image that copied his artistic style and fraudulently included his signature.

• “So, not only is it studying my artwork and trying to create artwork based off my work, but then it signs it with ‘Jason Seiler,'” the professional illustrator said.
• Seiler, who has spent his life perfecting caricatures for magazines, books, and films, expressed frustration that AI can replicate work “that would take me a week to do” in just two minutes.

The legal challenge: Artists face significant hurdles in pursuing legal action against AI-generated copies of their work.

• Intellectual property expert Joshua Sarnoff from DePaul University College of Law explained that artists need to identify both the AI tool used and the person who generated the content to have someone to sue.
• Even then, AI reproductions can often be considered fair use, making cases against AI companies particularly difficult to win.

Why style protection is complicated: Copyright law doesn’t clearly protect artistic styles, only specific works.

• “It is his style. And again, the question is, is a style itself copyrightable? And the answer is maybe, maybe not,” Sarnoff said.
• The expert noted that Seiler’s case becomes more complex because he hasn’t created a caricature of the specific person depicted in the AI-generated image.

What’s at stake: Two major AI cases in California could provide clearer legal precedent for artists’ rights.

• Both cases involve authors alleging AI companies copied their work, with courts so far citing fair use in favor of the AI companies.
• The decisions are expected to be appealed to higher courts, potentially establishing new legal standards.

The broader implications: Artists worry about AI’s impact on their ability to earn a living from their craft.

• “A lot of jobs have been replaced. And it’s scary for me because it’s literally my livelihood,” Seiler said.
• Sarnoff noted the tension between protecting creators and allowing AI to democratize content creation: “It makes people who are not experts able to generate content who never could. That’s a wonderful thing.”

Policy considerations: The Trump administration has indicated that overly restrictive regulations could stifle AI innovation and development.

• This creates a balance between protecting artists’ livelihoods and encouraging technological advancement that can lead to more content and ideas.