In recent months, major players in science fiction and popular culture have taken firmer stances against generative AI. Separate decisions by San Diego Comic-Con and the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Association illustrate the depth of opposition within these creative communities. They are not alone, as music distribution platform Bandcamp also recently banned generative AI content.
Last December, the SFWA announced updated rules for the Nebula Awards. Initially, works written entirely by large language models were declared ineligible, while authors who used LLMs at any point during the writing process had to disclose that use. This allowed award voters to make their own decisions. This change drew immediate backlash for seemingly opening the door to work partly created by LLMs.
The SFWA’s Board of Directors issued an apology a few days later, stating their approach and wording was wrong and apologizing for the distress caused. The rules were revised again. The current policy states that works written either wholly or partially by generative large language model tools are not eligible. Any work will be disqualified if LLMs were used at any point in its creation.
In follow-up commentary, journalist Jason Sanford said he was pleased to see SFWA listen to its members. He refuses to use generative AI in his own fiction writing, citing concerns over theft and a belief that the tools are not actually creative and defeat the point of storytelling. He also noted important questions need answering about how broadly LLM usage will be defined, especially as these tools are being integrated into many common products. He cautioned that writers who use word processing or research tools with LLM components should not be unfairly disqualified from awards or attacked.
Separately, the massive annual San Diego Comic-Con faced a similar controversy this month. Artists noticed rules initially allowed AI-generated art to be displayed, but not sold, at the convention’s art show. After artists complained, the rules were quietly changed to state that material created by artificial intelligence, either partially or wholly, is not allowed in the art show.
While Comic-Con’s apology was less public, some artists shared emailed responses from art show head Glen Wooten. He indicated the previous rules had been in place for a few years and had been an effective deterrent, as no one had entered AI-generated art. He stated the issue is becoming more of a problem, so more strident language was necessary.
It is probably safe to assume other organizations will announce similarly hard-line stances this year, and that these communities will continue debating the larger issues.