If you’ve been scrolling through social media recently, you’ve probably noticed a flood of pictures that seem as if they’ve come out of a Ghibli movie.

For a minute, I thought that Studio Ghibli had announced a new film or something. But that was not the case. Turns out, they were all AI-generated pictures inspired by Studio Ghibli’s drawing style.

But how did this trend start, and why is everyone hopping on it?

It all started when OpenAI launched its new image generator, powered by GPT-4o. Within hours, thousands of users were trying out the new feature with different prompts, curious to see what it could do.

It quickly became clear that the AI was great at creating images with a Studio Ghibli feel.

Social media was then bombarded with Ghibli-style versions of movie scenes, portraits of people and celebrities, and even generic pictures of places and streets.

What makes this trend further controversial is the fact that the White House hopped on it by using an AI Ghibli-inspired image, featuring Virginia Basora-Gonzalez, a convicted fentanyl trafficker who was previously deported and recently arrested by ICE after illegally reentering the U.S.

In their press release which introduces the new tool, OpenAI stated:

“GPT‑4o can analyze and learn from user-uploaded images, seamlessly integrating their details into its context to inform image generation”,

adding that they trained the model on images which reflect a vast variety of image styles, allowing the model to create or transform images convincingly.

The Ethical Dilemma of AI-Generated Art

Despite the popularity of the trend, we need to stop and think for a minute— is this trend actually okay, and are there no ethical concerns surrounding it?

Well, the answer varies from one person to another. Some people view AI photo generation models as tools that pave the way for innovation and creative visual expression, making art open and accessible to everyone.

Others, however, are firmly against the idea, considering it intellectual appropriation—a tool that kills creativity and art.

In a social media exchange, a user voiced her disapproval of the trend, affirming Miyazaki’s vision of hand-drawn art, where each scene is meticulously crafted frame by frame.

However, another user replied, arguing that

“No AI can replace Miyazaki’s work, otherwise, museums like the Louvre would have closed long ago, given that millions of copies of Da Vinci’s works have been available for years, sometimes in higher quality than the originals,”

But does this argument give us a free pass to continue replicating without questioning the ethics behind it?

Hayao Miyazaki, the founder of Studio Ghibli, an Oscar winner, and director of several of Ghibli’s most iconic works, such as Spirited Away, My Neighbor Totoro, The Boy and the Heron, is not a fan of AI himself. 

In a clip from the NHK documentary series “NHK Special: Hayao Miyazaki – The One Who Never Ends”, Miyazaki talked to a group of students who proposed a machine to create animated films.

“I am utterly disgusted. If you really want to make creepy stuff you can go ahead and do it. I would never wish to incorporate this technology into my work at all. I strongly feel this is an insult to life itself,”

he said.

Such a sentence should make us pause and reflect on the implications of AI-generated Ghibli art. AI is appropriating the legacy of an artist who has spent decades bringing the characters and stories in his films to life with passion and dedication.

Given that Miyazaki has openly opposed AI and described it as an insult to life itself, it raises important ethical questions about respect for artistic integrity.

This concern becomes even more profound when we consider Miyazaki’s creative and artistic philosophy, which is deeply rooted in craftsmanship, emotional depth, and a profound respect for life and nature.

He believes that animation should be created with a human touch, emphasizing hand-drawn artistry over digital methods. Miyazaki’s artistry is not just about creating visually stunning works but about breathing life into his films through deeply personal and humanistic storytelling. 

In the previous three years, several prominent artists have voiced opposition to AI-generated art, citing concerns over ethics, copyright infringement, and the devaluation of human creativity. 

For instance, Dutch digital artist Lois van Baarle, known as Loish, has criticized AI art platforms for using her work without consent or compensation.

In her blog, She argues that while musicians’ work is protected from such use, visual artists are treated differently, leading to exploitation. 

Similarly, artist Kelly McKernan discovered that her artwork was used to train AI models without her permission. She expressed concern over the potential impact on her career and the future of human creativity, describing the experience as “nauseating and devaluing.” ​

Additionally, Illustrator Alexander Nanitchkov initiated a protest against AI-generated images by creating a “No AI Art” symbol. He condemned AI art as being “created on the backs of hundreds of thousands of artists and photographers” whose work is used without consent or compensation.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Alexander Nanitchkov (@artofinca)

The Legal Debate Over AI Generated “Art”

As generative AI becomes more widespread, legal questions about its use are taking center stage. One pressing issue is whether users should be able to prompt AI tools to generate work that closely resembles copyrighted and trademarked content without explicit permission.

While some content creators and publishers argue that AI companies unlawfully scrape copyrighted material without permission, OpenAI defends its practices, emphasizing that its models do not simply reproduce existing works.

“OpenAI’s models are trained not to replicate works for consumption by the public. Instead, they learn from the works and extract patterns, linguistic structures, and contextual insights,”

OpenAI claimed.

“This means our AI model training aligns with the core objectives of copyright and the fair use doctrine, using existing works to create something wholly new and different without eroding the commercial value of those existing works.”

In 2023, many cases emerged alleging that AI models were trained on massive datasets containing millions of copyrighted works without proper licensing.

One high-profile lawsuit was filed by Getty Images against the creators of Stable Diffusion, accusing them of using its watermarked photographs without authorization, raising both copyright and trademark concerns.

In Andersen v. Stability AI, filed in late 2022, a group of artists sued multiple AI companies, arguing that their original works were used without permission to train AI models.

The lawsuit claims this has led to the generation of artwork that mimics their styles too closely, potentially creating unauthorized derivative works.

As AI-generated art becomes more popular day by day, the debate around its ethical implications will continue to grow.

Whether it’s hailed as a revolutionary tool for creativity or condemned as a force that exploits and undermines artists, one thing is certain: AI has taken a significant role across various fields, and is posing a challenge to our understanding of creativity, originality, and ownership in the digital age.