I don't usually look at the Misc section for PPU since I'm really only interested in the polishes. However, this is the most generic AI tarot print I've ever seen. The hand holding the cup (instead of a kettle or gaiwan?) incorrectly, the sage somehow going through the finger bones, the metacarpals not even lining up with the phalanges, two crescent moons in the bottom left? The last might be an artistic choice, but it's a strange one.
And at the very bottom of the description, PPU acknowledges it's likely (definitely) AI. Yet they still have it available for purchase this weekend. For $27, you too can have an AI tarot pouch. Ironically, produced by ManMade by J&S. I even looked up tarot fabric, and it isn't difficult to find non-AI fabrics. I like PPU because they promote a ton of indie brands that likely make their stuff in-house, plus the fun themes. I'm really not a fan of them allowing AI at all, especially such a blatant example. It feels disingenuous to the nature of PPU.
by AbyssDragonNamielle
5 Comments
So, the bag maker purchased this fabric elsewhere. The supplier didn’t disclose it was AI, but the bag maker has been informed and it should include a disclosure in the listing details per PPU rules.
There was a huge dust up about AI use when HHC allowed an artist to submit stamping plates with images that were AI generated and rightfully so.
I don’t like PPU advertising and selling AI bullshit tbh.
The seller made an announcement about it once they realized. They said they bought the fabric and the fabric makers had bought the “art” off Etsy and didn’t realize it was AI. Once everyone learned the truth the seller disclosed what happened.
Unfortunately PPU is this week so they had already sunk their money into making the bags so they’re still for sale, just with a disclosure about what happened
The controversy with other makers like Sugar Bubbles was that they intentionally used AI and refused to disclose it to PPU or customers. They did the same thing in HHC which is why they got booted from both
Distasteful imagery, too.
Copying the reply I left to a comment thread here:
So, most custom print fabric houses (such as spoonflower and many of the fabric wholesalers that offer this service) don’t actually review each art piece for copyright. They rely on honest self-reporting that you, the designer, own the copyright to the image. This fabric is available on Spoonflower, meaning the person who uploaded the pattern failed to disclose the AI use when first uploading it and posting it for sale.
The bag maker is still out the money for the fabric, as there’s no recourse to get their money back from Spoonflower in this case. They technically didn’t have any AI disclosure policies when last I checked. So, I think this is a case where we can’t be too mad at the person who made the bag because they didn’t know it was AI and are now trying to make the best of a shitty situation.
Added note: this is not to say I think that AI use is okay (I’m vehemently anti-ai) or that selling things that use ai slop is okay. I just think we should give PPU and the bag maker a little grace on this one.