AI platforms and AI developers should not have absolute entitlement or freedom to go into any area without any purpose.
Mumbai: A wave of controversy recently swept through the creative world when OpenAI showcased its ability to generate visuals that uncannily mimic the signature style of Studio Ghibli—the beloved Japanese animation studio known for its hand-drawn magic and emotional storytelling. What began as an impressive display of generative AI’s technical skill has since evolved into a deeper debate around originality, ethics, and the future of creativity.
For brand marketers and creative professionals, this moment is more than a cultural flashpoint—it’s a signal of what’s coming. As AI tools like DALL·E and Midjourney become more accessible and sophisticated, their potential to reshape the creative process is undeniable. Brands are already experimenting with AI-generated content for speed, scale, and novelty. But as we venture into this new territory, the Ghibli controversy is a timely reminder: inspiration can quickly blur into imitation, and with it comes a host of legal, ethical, and brand integrity concerns.
Hayao Miyazaki, the legendary co-founder of Studio Ghibli, has famously criticized AI art as soulless, calling it “an insult to life itself.” In contrast, OpenAI’s Sam Altman has leaned into the cultural moment, highlighting the power of AI to expand creative possibilities. This tension—between artistic legacy and technological innovation—is now playing out in brand boardrooms and agency war rooms.
From a branding standpoint, the allure is obvious: AI can evoke emotion, nostalgia, and even cultural cachet in a fraction of the time and cost of traditional methods. But here’s the risk—using AI-generated styles that echo iconic artists or studios may trigger backlash from fans, lawsuits from rights holders, or worse, a crisis of authenticity that erodes trust in the brand.
So the question isn’t just can AI help brands create? It’s how should we use it responsibly, creatively, and ethically?
This isn’t a hypothetical scenario. It’s already influencing how campaigns are conceptualized, how assets are produced, and how audiences engage with branded content. For marketers and creative, the Ghibli-AI episode is a wake-up call to navigate the fine line between innovation and appropriation—before it’s drawn for them
Read More:
https://madeinmedia.in/from-inspiration-to-infringement-how-ai-is-redefining-brand-creativity/
https://madeinmedia.in/regulation-transparency-and-ethical-best-practices-will-play-a-vital-role-in-maintaining-this-balance-nagessh-pannaswami/
https://madeinmedia.in/at-pulp-we-use-ai-heavily-but-always-with-intent-we-never-outsource-imagination-thats-a-line-we-wont-cross-ambika-sharma/
https://madeinmedia.in/striking-the-balance-honouring-artistic-heritage-while-embracing-technological-innovation/
https://madeinmedia.in/its-the-authentic-creators-who-will-survive-they-have-spirit-they-have-soul-machines-dont-soumita-das/
In Conversation with Nien Siao, Dean, JS Institute of Design on this controversy, and how as a Design expert she views this ……….
Nien is a design doyen with over 30 years of experience in design education and practice. She holds leadership positions at prestigious institutions like Pearl Academy and IILM University.
Her expertise spans design academics, business strategy, and design management.
As a design practitioner, she has worked extensively in various domains, including fashion, textiles, and crafts. She actively contributes to design education, serving as an advisor to universities across India.
How OpenAI’s ability to mimic Studio Ghibli’s aesthetic affecting the art and animation industry?
Well, it’s a time to celebrate at the same time I do think it is sad to have Studio Ghibli’s style being copied by a so-called machine. It is affecting the whole visual world in many ways. I am not very sure if the art field will be affected because I feel art is still very personal and subjective, created by an artist. And Ghibli’s style of visual representation through its animated figures has a specific impression and is well known.
However, when Open AI steps up and creates such imitation, they should really be crediting the studio with the very basis of its origin and the way it is being imitated. In industries like animation, stories and narrative are very important, and I believe that cannot be copied. At some point, AI may be able to mimic it. But does that increase its value just because it’s created by anyone using only a machine, without putting in effort? I think that’s a big question mark. I’m not very sure it will really last, it’s a novelty at the moment, and I believe it will die a natural death.
In the process, unfortunately, we have made the world entitled. I mean, every person who has not worked at building any particular narrative, has not paid attention to building a style will be able to create anything they want. For me it is a very sad affair at the moment. It’s like saying anyone can just put in a prompt and tomorrow, any individual will be able to take any scientific research and use it comfortably.
The ethical and legal implications for artists and brands?
For any form of progress whether for an artist, scientist, business, they all research and develop concepts for their own purpose. It is absolutely unethical. This means the principled way in which human beings behave is going to be in question. If it’s just picked up, and beyond picking it up, imitated, and then developed further to get the rest of society around you to use it in any way they want, I think it’s very unethical. This has happened in the case of Studio Ghibli’s aesthetic style and its narrative.
This is what we need to say: to youngsters, to students, and even perhaps to societies around us. We need to encourage them to question such developments. These developments encourage entitlements just because a tech has been discovered. At the moment I don’t think there is much legal implication. However, I would very strongly recommend that legal action be taken. AI platforms and AI developers should not have absolute entitlement or freedom to go into any area without any purpose. If any individual, people, or communities are harmed, whether it’s monetarily, sentimentally, or emotionally, then I think actions should be taken against them.
No one has the right to encroach on somebody else’s developments without acknowledging or crediting the originators in many ways. I strongly believe that we need to look at AI seriously to see what pathways it is taking up. If it is unfiltered, it could actually be very dangerous.
How is this trend influencing branding, advertising, and creative industries?
I think the creative industries get excited with the advancements in the field of AI and ML. I think it’s so common, widespread, and accessible that anyone can do it. Because of this, I have a feeling that eventually, the average person, those who are not involved in creative work, might get tired of it. I also think that if it becomes so widespread, brands and advertising campaigns, or any creative industry, won’t take it very seriously.
They likely won’t use this medium or new initiation to launch their campaigns. This is how I see the trend developing. I am not very sure they really feel Hayao Miyazaki needs to be credited, or he needs to be given some homage just because it’s such a lift off from the kind of work they are doing but I hope more sense prevails. We need to gain a better understanding of how AI is going to behave. In that case, all these industries have a harder task ahead. However, this is what is going to push the creative industry to the next level.
Industry perspectives on Hayao Miyazaki’s AI art skepticism vs. Sam Altman’s embrace of AI-generated styles?
I think both of them belong to the opposite sides of industries. Sam Altman’s job and life are about generating and developing machines like OpenAI. That’s where he is going to make his mark or already has. However, right now it is so unfettered, so unrestrained, that everybody is allowed whatever they want. This means we are stepping on many toes—not only toes, but people’s sentiments, their emotions, their life’s work where they have developed over decades, even half a century. I do believe AI development and the people responsible for such development should be responsible for any such encroachment.
It’s absolutely unacceptable. On the other hand, consider Miyazaki’s perspective. The way he developed his style and narrative through Studio Ghibli is a labor of love for art. That is what he has been working on, and I have no doubt he has invested all his toil, sweat, and blood into everything he has been doing. His take on this work, the animation style, and the narratives is really a product of a period—a reflection of how they perceive the world to be. It is not going to be easy for him to accept it. I think he should get some token of appreciation and recognition. It is not enough to just be named as SG art style. I hope he expresses it more because tomorrow, AI is going to encroach on every artist. It will also affect any well-known visual designer who has built a particular style through their own effort, a style that may be loved by people. I think they should also benefit or profit from it in many ways, beyond just monetary gains. And I believe their contribution towards design and art should really be acknowledged.
Sam Altman and people like him are going to continue their technology and developments without empathy. I see them not being very empathetic to such thinking. They need to be drawn towards that, and perhaps it’s the users who will ultimately do it. I do not think any developer, or any industry or brand should be given so much power to go ahead unhindered, probably crushing many people’s hopes, dreams, and efforts.
I’m not very sure it will really last, it’s a novelty at the moment, and I believe it will die a natural death: Nien Siao.
