The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence has profoundly impacted creative industries, prompting discussions around creativity, authorship, and responsibility. In a recent interview, Alex Reben, an artist specializing in latent space art, and Chandra Rangan, CMO of Neo4j, explored how AI intersects with human creativity, its implications for intellectual property, and the challenges posed by deepfake content.
Who owns AI-generated art?
Alex Reben addresses a critical question: Who deserves credit when art is generated by AI—humans or machines? Drawing parallels to historical debates in photography, Reben highlights that technological evolution continuously reshapes our understanding of creativity. “Photography raised questions about creativity simply by pushing a button,” he explains. Similarly, artists who instruct teams to execute their vision without physically creating the artwork raise comparable concerns. “Is speaking to an AI different from directing a human crew?”
Reben argues that from a philosophical standpoint, AI-generated art remains a “gray area” without clear-cut answers. Legal definitions, intellectual property rights, and philosophical debates continue evolving as AI becomes increasingly sophisticated.
Tackling deepfakes and misinformation
Chandra Rangan focuses on another pressing challenge: identifying deepfake content. Rangan emphasizes that while tools exist to detect AI-generated fakes, the process remains a “cat and mouse” game as technology rapidly advances. Recognizing individual deepfakes is complex, but detecting patterns of misinformation or fraud through AI-driven analysis could be more effective.
Neo4j, for example, partnered with Syracuse University to analyze social media data around the 2024 U.S. elections. Their research revealed hidden networks, exposing multiple seemingly independent entities as fronts for coordinated misinformation campaigns. AI’s ability to reveal such broader patterns is critical for combating misinformation at scale.
Staying ahead of AI
With AI’s rapid evolution, individuals worry about technology potentially replacing human jobs. Reben advises remaining informed through continuous engagement and experimentation with new AI technologies. Similarly, Rangan suggests that personal experience with AI fosters better understanding and reduces fear of being replaced. Awareness, he says, is crucial in adapting to AI-driven changes.
Control, regulation, and ethical use
The interview also tackles the nuanced issue of controlling AI. Both Reben and Rangan note the complexity of “control,” involving multiple stakeholders—individuals, organizations, and governments—across varying levels. Rangan underscores that control mechanisms could range from legislation and company self-regulation to individual accountability. The absence of clear answers calls for ongoing self-regulation, emphasizing education on responsible AI usage to ensure that the technology remains beneficial rather than detrimental.
In conclusion, AI’s intersection with creativity and information integrity presents profound philosophical and practical challenges. Ongoing dialogue, experimentation, and careful consideration of ethical implications remain essential as society navigates this transformative era.
