Yesterday, there was a discussion along the lines of,

“Why is it okay to post manga panels on Twitter, but not okay to share AI-generated knockoffs?”

I responded, “Honestly, neither is really okay – it all depends on what makes the rights holders angry.” But then, what exactly makes rights holders angry?

Let me preface this by saying this is purely speculative and based on my personal impression.

Rights holders don’t just think about their own gain or loss – they also consider the well-being of their “village.” For example, manga artists belong to the “manga artist village.” Manga artists generally don’t get too upset over things like, “Hey, isn’t this person imitating my style?” Why? Because they themselves didn’t invent all their techniques from scratch – they grew by borrowing and learning from the techniques of senior artists.

Since they were able to develop thanks to the support of the “village,” they feel an obligation to support the younger generation in the same village. Sure, being imitated might cause them some minor personal loss, but if that helps a younger artist succeed, it brings vitality to the entire village, which is a net positive for the community.

But what about AI knockoffs? If AI knockoffs become widespread, not only do individual manga artists lose out, but the “manga artist village” itself could collapse. Maybe AI knockoffs have their own “AI village,” but that’s not the manga artists’ village. Therefore, from this perspective, there’s a high risk of AI knockoffs being treated as enemies and suppressed. If the “AI village” is seen as simply stealing resources from others without giving anything back, that’s a huge problem.

So, what should the AI village do? Maybe they could try saying, “Actually, we’re part of the manga artist village, too! Look, using AI makes your work so much easier and more convenient – we’re contributing to the village! We’re not your enemy!” By taking this approach and trying to integrate into the “village,” they might have a better shot at being accepted.