This is an ongoing battle, and the jury is out on who will win it.
Mumbai: The recent controversy surrounding OpenAI’s ability to generate visuals mimicking Studio Ghibli’s distinct artistic style has reignited a long-simmering global conversation—one that sits at the nexus of technology, creativity, and ethics. What began as a showcase of technical prowess has quickly escalated into a broader cultural debate: can machines truly replicate the soul of human artistry, and if they can, should they?
At the heart of this controversy lies the reverence for Studio Ghibli—a Japanese animation powerhouse known for its handcrafted beauty, emotional depth, and the visionary storytelling of its co-founder, Hayao Miyazaki. For decades, Ghibli’s work has represented the pinnacle of animation artistry, inspiring generations of creators and audiences alike. Miyazaki himself has been vocal about his disdain for AI-generated art, once calling it “an insult to life itself.” So when AI tools began producing eerily accurate renditions in Ghibli’s signature style, it struck a nerve—not just with fans, but across the wider creative community.
On the other side of the spectrum is Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, who has embraced the growing capabilities of generative AI and its potential to democratize creativity. This stark contrast in philosophies has sparked an international dialogue: are we witnessing the evolution of creativity, or the erosion of it?
What makes this debate particularly significant is how it’s beginning to influence adjacent industries like branding, marketing, and advertising. With agencies and brands constantly on the hunt for fresh, eye-catching content that resonates culturally, the allure of AI-generated aesthetics—especially ones that tap into powerful nostalgic or artistic sentiments—is undeniable. Yet, it also raises complex questions about authorship, ownership, and authenticity.
Are we simply reimagining creative expression through new tools, or are we at risk of diluting the very essence of what makes human-created art unique? And more pressingly for brands: is leveraging AI-generated art inspired by copyrighted or culturally sacred styles a clever marketing move—or a legal and ethical minefield?
As the lines blur between inspiration and imitation, it’s a conversation that’s not just academic—it’s already playing out in real time across campaign boards, pitch meetings, and digital design studios. If it’s not on your radar yet, it probably should be.
In conversation with Upasana Dua, Executive Strategy Director, Landor India, on this controversy …….
Upasana is a seasoned brand strategist with a proven track record of building and transforming brands across diverse categories through the integrated lens of design, advertising, and marketing. With a keen understanding of evolving consumer behaviour and a passion for deep consumer insight, she crafts innovative and impactful brand strategies that resonate with audiences and drive business growth.
With a holistic approach that balances creativity and strategy, Upasana believes in the power of storytelling, purposeful design, and insight-led thinking to shape meaningful brand experiences. Whether launching new brands or revitalizing established ones, she consistently brings clarity, consistency, and creative excellence to every stage of the brand journey.
How OpenAI’s ability to mimic Studio Ghibli’s aesthetic affecting the art and animation industry?
While animation is increasingly becoming democratized, the associated word is also commoditisation. More and more people being able to “do” something automatically reduces its inherent value. Additionally, this has significant ramifications for junior animation artists who are more likely to become redundant.
Copyright and ethical concerns are a serious topic of conversation, and the way around it isn’t in sight at this point. I believe that authenticity in art is special. The more we are able to easily replicate something, the more it loses in its authenticity, and the more brand custodians will find anything hard to own.
The ethical and legal implications for artists and brands?
Artists need to be compensated for their intellectual property. It’s that simple. That said, it seems like demanding the same will continue to be an uphill task for them until some real reforms and regulations are put in place, removing the greys.
As for brands, they will need to think about ‘experiences’ beyond just visual language. Ownability is hard in this AI age, and unless there is a human experience that can connect with consumers very meaningfully, everything else will belong to a million other people in no time.
How is this trend influencing branding, advertising, and creative industries?
Everyone is nervous. And rightly so. The way forward, though, is to embrace things instead of fighting them. Brands and agencies that are using AI-generated animation and design to their advantage are finding that it can augment human ideation. Those that are limiting its use for ideation are benefiting, and those that are going beyond that have a few legal battles to fight. Rightly so!
Industry perspectives on Hayao Miyazaki’s AI art skepticism vs. Sam Altman’s embrace of AI-generated styles?
This is an ongoing battle, and the jury is out on who will win it. Both have their perspective – one speaks of the lack of human touch and originality. The other talks about fresher creative avenues and increased business efficiency. Artists are guarded. Businessmen are excited.
In this industry, many believe that we must give the artist their due. The art belongs to them. As for originality and human involvement, AI-generated animation is still a ‘sophisticated remix’. No one knows how quickly that will change in the coming months and years. And that is a concern.
I believe that authenticity in art is special: Upasana Dua
