Studio Ghibli may sue OpenAI over viral AI-generated art mimicking its style

The viral ChatGPT “Ghibli style” trend has sparked new debates around AI copyright implications for iconic visual styles, potentially setting significant legal precedents for creative industries. As OpenAI scrambles to block these image generation requests, legal experts suggest the situation could lead to a landmark case exploring whether AI companies can be held accountable for mimicking distinctive artistic aesthetics—pushing the boundaries of what qualifies as protected intellectual property in the AI era.

The big picture: Studio Ghibli may have legal grounds to sue OpenAI over the viral trend of AI-generated images mimicking the iconic Japanese animation studio’s distinctive style, according to former Showtime general counsel and AI expert Rob Rosenberg.

• The situation has ignited renewed debate about AI’s impact on human artists and raised questions about whether distinctive visual styles deserve copyright protection.
• OpenAI has implemented inconsistent restrictions on generating Ghibli-style images after the trend exploded in popularity, with even CEO Sam Altman participating by joking about being turned into a “twink ghibli style.”

Potential legal arguments: Rosenberg suggests Studio Ghibli could pursue claims under the Lanham Act, which covers trademark infringement, false advertising, and unfair competition.

• The studio might argue OpenAI is unfairly trading off Ghibli’s established trademarks and distinctive visual style.
• Claims could center on consumer confusion about potential endorsement and possible copyright infringement through AI model training practices.

Industry context: OpenAI already faces multiple lawsuits related to its training data practices, including a copyright lawsuit from The New York Times that recently survived a dismissal attempt.

• The outcome of potential Ghibli litigation could help establish whether AI companies must compensate and credit copyright holders whose content influences AI-generated outputs.
• Rosenberg notes that beyond legal concerns, OpenAI’s actions might have preemptively blocked Studio Ghibli from launching its own photo transformation tools.

Why this matters: The case highlights the growing tension between AI advancement and creative intellectual property as generative AI increasingly replicates distinctive artistic styles that previously required years of human skill development.

• Resolution of these issues could fundamentally reshape how AI companies approach training, attribution, and compensation for creative influences.