The Great Ghibli Gambit: AI, Art, and the Chaos of Creation

1 - Introduction: A Tale of Pixels and Principles

2 - The Joyful Anarchy of the Masses

3 - The Dragon’s Roar: Miyazaki’s Stand

4 - The Legal Labyrinth: Lawsuits, Fair Use, and the Ghibli Gambit

4.1 - A Courtroom of Chaos

4.2 - The Ghibli Conundrum: Input and Output

4.3 - Fair Use: The Slippery Slope

4.4 - The Lawsuit Ledger: A Rogues’ Gallery

4.5 - Miyazaki’s Ghost in the Machine

4.6 - The Global Ghibli Gambit: A World Stage of Law and Lunacy

4.7 - The Future: Order or Anarchy?

5 - The Ethical Abyss: Art, Soul, and the Machine’s Merry Jest

5.1 - The Spark and the Shadow

5.2 - The Artist’s Lament

5.3 - The Muse Unmoored

5.4 - The Fan’s Feast vs. The Creator’s Fast

5.5 - A Mirror to the Age

5.6 - The Final Jest

6. References

1 - Introduction: A Tale of Pixels and Principles

On March 25, 2025, OpenAI flung open the doors of its ChatGPT4o upgrade, unleashing a beast of image-making wizardry upon the world [1]. Suddenly, every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a subscription could conjure images in the style of Studio Ghibli - those lush, hand-drawn dreamscapes spun by Hayao Miyazaki, a man who’d sooner wrestle a dragon than let a machine touch his art. The internet, predictably, went berserk. Photos of cats, memes of historical blunders, even Elon Musk’s smirking mug - all morphed into whimsical Ghibli-esque visions [2]. It’s a marvel, a delight, a blooming chaos of creativity! And yet, beneath the glitter lies a shadow: the specter of copyright, gnashing its teeth, ready to drag this merry romp into the courts of law and lore.

Here we stand, at the crossroads of genius and thievery, where the soul of art meets the cold steel of code. This is no mere trend; it’s a parable of our age - a clash of human spirit against the mechanical maw. Let’s dig into the marrow of it, shall we?

2 - The Joyful Anarchy of the Masses

Picture this: Janu Lingeswaran, a chap with a cat and a dream, uploads a fuzzy photo to ChatGPT4o. Moments later, out pops an image - his moggy now a wide-eyed, Ghibli-fied sprite, prancing through a forest of impossible green [3].

Across X, users fling their own offerings into the fray: a Tiananmen Square tank reimagined as a Totoro-like behemoth, or Sam Altman’s own profile pic, grinning in anime splendor [4]. It’s a carnival of creation, a riot of nostalgia! For twenty bucks a month, the Pro-tier plebs have seized the tools of the gods, and the free-tier peasants are left hammering at the gates, demanding entry [5]. OpenAI, swamped by the sheer glee of it all, delays the rollout to the unwashed masses - proof, if proof were needed, that beauty still moves the world [6].

This is the human spirit at play, unshackled from the drudgery of draftsmanship. You don’t need Miyazaki’s decades of toil to dance in his world now - just a prompt and a prayer. And yet, as the crowd cheers, a voice cuts through the din: Miyazaki himself, glowering from his tower of tradition.

3 - The Dragon’s Roar: Miyazaki’s Stand

Hayao Miyazaki, that grizzled sage of animation, doesn’t mince words. Back in 2016, he watched an AI churn out a grotesque mockery of art and spat, “I am utterly disgusted. An insult to life itself.” [7]. If you think he’d softened by 2025, you’ve not met the man. His Studio Ghibli isn’t just a brand - it’s a philosophy, a labor of love etched in ink and sweat. Every frame of Spirited Away or My Neighbor Totoro is a testament to human struggle, to the chaos of creation tamed by hand and heart. And now? Now comes this silicon pretender, this ChatGPT4o, slurping up Ghibli’s essence like a greedy imp and spitting it back out for the masses [8].

The backlash isn’t just Miyazaki’s - it’s a chorus. Artists, those beleaguered souls, see their livelihoods teetering. Sarah Anderson and Kelly McKernan, for instance, have hauled AI giants like Stability AI into court, claiming their works were devoured to train these models [9]. Imagine it: your life’s work, fed to a machine that churns out pale echoes for a pittance. It’s not just theft - it’s a cosmic jest, a punchline delivered by a soulless algorithm.

4 - The Legal Labyrinth: Lawsuits, Fair Use, and the Ghibli Gambit

4.1 - A Courtroom of Chaos

Step into the arena, where the clash of titans unfolds - not with swords or sorcery, but with briefs and gavels. OpenAI’s ChatGPT4o, that gleaming engine of pixelated wonder, has hurled us into a legal maelstrom, and the Studio Ghibli trend is but the latest spark in a tinderbox of copyright contention [10]. The courts, those solemn arbiters of order, are awash with lawsuits, each a thread in a tapestry of chaos that could unravel the very fabric of artistic ownership. Here, the human spirit wrestles with the machine’s cold grasp, and the stakes are nothing less than the soul of creation itself.

As of this moment - April 03, 2025 - the legal battlefield is littered with skirmishes. OpenAI faces a barrage of suits, from The New York Times to a cadre of artists, all howling that their works were pilfered to fuel the AI’s insatiable appetite [11]. The Times, that venerable scribe, alleges its articles were scraped without a whisper of consent, stuffed into GPT-4o’s belly to churn out summaries that dance too close to the original [12]. Across the pond, Getty Images has unsheathed its own blade against Stability AI in London’s High Court, claiming millions of copyrighted images were devoured to birth Stable Diffusion [13]. And then there’s the trio of artists - Sarah Anderson, Kelly McKernan, and Karla Ortiz - locked in a California brawl with Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt, asserting their art was ingested without so much as a handshake [14]. Ortiz, a disciple of Miyazaki’s craft, has called OpenAI’s Ghibli gambit “exploitation” pure and simple, a sentiment that echoes like a war drum [15].

4.2 - The Ghibli Conundrum: Input and Output

Now, pivot to Studio Ghibli itself, that hallowed shrine of hand-drawn marvels. No lawsuit has yet emerged from Tokyo’s quiet streets, but the air crackles with possibility. The legal quandary splits in twain: the input - did OpenAI train its beast on Ghibli’s sacred frames? - and the output - do these Ghibli-fied memes infringe on the studio’s rights? On the input front, the law is a murky bog. Copyright, that stern old codger, guards works, not styles, so OpenAI might argue it’s merely aping a vibe, not stealing a scene [16]. But if Miyazaki’s films - or even fan art born of them - were fed into the machine without license, the dragon’s jaws could snap shut. Proving it, though, is a devil’s errand; it’d take a discovery process to unearth the training data, and OpenAI’s lips are sealed tighter than a wizard’s grimoire [17].

The output’s a different beast. These Ghibli-style images - Trump as a Totoro, Disaster Girl grinning amid animated flames - aren’t exact copies, but they trade on Ghibli’s brand, its je ne sais quoi. Could Studio Ghibli cry foul under trademark law, claiming dilution of its mystique? Perhaps, but the Lanham Act’s a fickle friend, and courts might scoff unless the studio can show real harm [18]. Worse still, the U.S. Copyright Office has ruled AI-generated works sans human touch can’t be copyrighted [19], leaving these images as legal orphans - free to roam, but owned by none. It’s a cosmic jest: the machine creates, yet the law shrugs.

4.3 - Fair Use: The Slippery Slope

Enter the doctrine of fair use, that slippery imp of copyright law, waving its banner of exceptions. Fair use is judged case-by-case using four factors: purpose, nature, amount used, and market effect. OpenAI and its ilk cling to it like a lifeline, arguing their AI’s alchemy is transformative - not mere mimicry, but a new beast entirely [20]. The precedent’s a mixed bag. Take Google v. Oracle (2021): the Supreme Court blessed Google’s use of Oracle’s code as fair, citing its transformative purpose in building Android [21]. Could ChatGPT4o claim the same, turning Ghibli’s frames into a tool for fan frolics? Maybe - if the courts buy that it’s not competing with Miyazaki’s market.

But the winds are shifting. In Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence (2025), a Delaware court rejected the fair use defense, concluding that training on Westlaw’s copyrighted headnotes was non-transformative and commercially competitive [22]. The case didn’t deal with generative AI directly, but its logic may ripple into how courts view training data in art models like GPT-4o. If Ghibli’s style is deemed a market unto itself - one OpenAI’s tool could usurp - the fair use shield might crumple. Contrast that with Authors Guild v. Google (2015), where Google Books’ snippets were lauded as transformative, not substitutive [23]. The Ghibli case teeters on this edge: are these AI images a homage or a heist? The courts, still deliberating in dozens of AI suits, haven’t sung the final note [24].

4.5 - Miyazaki’s Ghost in the Machine

What of Studio Ghibli’s odds? Experts like Christa Laser, an IP sage from Cleveland State, reckon an output-based suit would falter - style’s too ethereal to pin down [15]. An input case, though, could sting if Ghibli proves its works were fodder for GPT-4o. Japan’s laxer laws on AI training might shield OpenAI there, but a U.S. suit could pierce that veil [17]. Imagine Miyazaki, that grizzled maestro, storming the stand: “I poured my soul into every frame, and you’ve fed it to a soulless box!” The jury’d weep, but the law’s a colder beast.

The studio might also rue lost chances. As AI expert Rob Rosenberg notes, if Ghibli fancied its own photo-to-anime tool, OpenAI’s pre-emptive strike stole that thunder [17]. It’s a theft of potential, a shadow on the balance sheet. And what if some rogue passes off Ghibli-fied fakes as canon? The line blurs, and authenticity - Ghibli’s lifeblood - bleeds out.

4.6 - The Global Ghibli Gambit: A World Stage of Law and Lunacy

Zoom out, now, from the courtroom’s dusty corners to the grand theater of the globe, where nations grapple with AI’s copyright conundrum like wizards squabbling over a misfired spell. The ChatGPT4o Ghibli trend isn’t just a local spat - it’s a flare lighting up a fractured world of rules, from Brussels’ stern edicts to Beijing’s bold reforms and America’s laissez-faire swagger. Here, the struggle for order dances with the chaos of innovation, and Miyazaki’s ghost looms large over it all.

Take the European Union, that bureaucratic behemoth, which unsheathed its AI Act in July 2024 - a tome of law so weighty it could anchor a ship [27]. This beast sorts AI by risk, from “unacceptable” (think dystopian mind-benders) to “minimal” (mere parlor tricks), and lands generative AI like ChatGPT4o in a curious middle ground. It’s not high-risk, but it’s not free to frolic either - developers must spill a “sufficiently detailed summary” of their training data, bowing to EU copyright lords [28]. Imagine OpenAI scribbling a list: “We nabbed a bit of Ghibli here, some Tolkien there - sorry, chaps!” It’s a transparency gambit, meant to shield creators while letting AI roam, but critics howl it’s a loophole big enough to fly a dragon through [29]. Peterson might nod gravely: it’s order’s noble try against chaos’ tide. Pratchett? He’d snicker at the paperwork piling up like Luggage on the Disc.

Then there’s China, striding forth with copyright reforms that’d make a mandarin proud. In November 2023, the Beijing Internet Court crowned an AI-made image with copyright, so long as human wit sparked it - a nod to originality amid the machine’s hum [30]. By March 2025, new laws piled on: AI outputs must wear labels like a peddler’s wares, and firms face the lash for missteps [31]. The Guangzhou Internet Court’s February 2024 ruling nailed a generative AI provider for spitting out Ultraman knockoffs, proving China’s not joking [32]. It’s a tight leash - state control meets creative spark - where Miyazaki’s hand-drawn ethos might find grudging kin. Chaos is kenneled here, but at what cost to the wild muse?

America, meanwhile, plays the maverick, loosening reins where others tighten. No grand AI law graces Congress yet; instead, it’s a patchwork of precedent and shrugs [33]. The U.S. Copyright Office holds firm: AI-only works get no crown [19], but fair use - that slippery jester - keeps the door ajar for training on copyrighted scraps [34]. Lawsuits like NYT v. OpenAI grind on, but whispers of a softer touch grow louder - bills like the No AI FRAUD Act nudge, not mandate [35]. It’s freedom’s gamble: let the market sort it, and damn the torpedoes. Peterson might warn of unchecked chaos devouring meaning; Pratchett’d toast the anarchic glee of it all.

So, the globe spins a three-ring circus: the EU’s meticulous net, China’s iron grip, America’s wild ride. Each toys with the Ghibli gambit differently - protecting art’s soul or unleashing AI’s whimsy. Miyazaki’s legacy hangs in the balance, a thread in a tapestry of law stretched taut across borders. Who wins? The courts, the coders, or the chaos itself? That’s the riddle yet unwritten.

4.7 - The Future: Order or Anarchy?

This legal circus is no sideshow - it’s the main event. If courts bless AI training as fair use, the floodgates yawn wide; every artist’s work becomes grist for the mill, compensation be damned [12]. If they rule against, OpenAI and kin might face a reckoning - license fees, credits, or a retreat to public-domain scraps. The U.S. Copyright Office, sniffing the wind, has mulled tighter rules, but Congress dawdles [36]. Meanwhile, OpenAI lobbies for fair use to be its shield, eyeing a $40 billion war chest from SoftBank [37].

For now, the Ghibli trend dances on, a merry prank with a dark underbelly. It’s Peterson’s chaos versus order: the machine’s wild freedom threatens the artist’s sacred ground. Pratchett would cackle at the absurdity - lawsuits piling up like luggage on the Discworld’s edge, all while the fans churn out Totoro-Trumps. The resolution? A coin toss in a storm, with Miyazaki’s ghost watching, unamused.

4.4 - The Lawsuit Ledger: A Rogues’ Gallery

Let’s tally the combatants. The New York Times suit, filed in 2023, scored a win in March 2025 when a Manhattan judge let most claims march forward, rejecting OpenAI’s plea to dismiss [25]. The Times showcased GPT-4o spitting out near-verbatim passages - a damning exhibit if ever there was one. Stability AI’s woes deepen with Andersen v. Stability AI (2023), where Judge Orrick trimmed claims but kept the core infringement charge alive, hinging on whether Stable Diffusion holds “compressed copies” of art [26]. The plaintiffs amended their salvo, alleging inducement of infringement, but the fair use question looms unanswered [18].

Meta’s not unscathed either. In Kadrey v. Meta (2023), authors claimed LLaMA was trained on their books, but the court axed most counts, sparing only the training-data claim [18]. And in the U.K., Getty’s battle with Stability AI could set a global precedent, though details remain veiled [13]. No court has yet ruled definitively on fair use for AI training, leaving us in a limbo of legal limbo - a Pratchett-esque farce where the rules are rewritten mid-game.

5 - The Ethical Abyss: Art, Soul, and the Machine’s Merry Jest

5.1 - The Spark and the Shadow

And so we arrive at the heart of it - not the cold machinery of law, but the warm, messy pulse of ethics, where the ChatGPT4o Ghibli trend reveals a tale as old as fire: the struggle to define what makes us human. Here, in the flickering light of Miyazaki’s hand-drawn worlds, we confront a paradox. OpenAI’s tool offers a spark - fans conjuring Totoro-fied cats and Ghibli-esque memes with a flick of a prompt [2] - yet casts a shadow over the very soul of creation. It’s a dance of delight and dread, a cosmic jest where the machine plays puppeteer, and we’re left wondering who pulls the strings.

Peterson might frame it thus: art is the crucible where chaos meets order, where we wrestle meaning from the void. Miyazaki’s Spirited Away, with its painstaking frames, is a testament to that struggle - a human hand taming the wild muse over years of toil [38]. Pratchett, ever the imp, would wink and say it’s all a grand lark - until the machine starts scribbling the punchlines. The ethical question looms: when AI apes Ghibli’s style, does it honor that spark, or snuff it out?

5.2 - The Artist’s Lament

Consider the artist’s lot, those weary souls who pour their essence into every stroke. Hayao Miyazaki, at 84, has called AI art “an insult to life itself”, a cri de cœur from a man who sees machines as soulless interlopers [7]. He’s not alone. Across the digital wilds, creators like Karla Ortiz - a concept artist steeped in Ghibli’s lineage - rail against AI’s encroachment. Ortiz, locked in a lawsuit with Stability AI, fears her commissions dwindling as clients opt for cheap, Ghibli-fied knockoffs churned out by ChatGPT4o [9]. It’s not mere paranoia; online marketplaces already hawk AI art in artists’ styles, undercutting the human hand [26]. One X user quipped, “Why pay $500 for a Miyazaki-esque sketch when ChatGPT does it for $20 a month?” [39]. The jest stings.

This is no abstract woe - it’s a dagger to the livelihood. According to a 2023 survey by the Authors Guild, 90% of writers believe they should be compensated if their work is used to train AI models, and many report declining income from illustration and freelance commissions - a quiet bleed masked by the fanfare [40]. For every Janu Lingeswaran delighting in his Ghibli-fied cat [3], an artist somewhere tallies a lost gig. It’s a zero-sum game dressed up as progress, and the ethical weight presses hard: should joy for the many come at the cost of the few who forge the path? Peterson might thunder that society crumbles when it discards its creators; Pratchett’d mutter that the gods of commerce always did love a bargain.

5.3 - The Muse Unmoored

Beyond the purse, there’s a deeper rot - the unmooring of the muse itself. Miyazaki’s craft is slow, deliberate, a meditation on life’s fleeting beauty [8]. ChatGPT4o’s Ghibli trick? A flick of the wrist, a second’s work - whimsical, yes, but hollow as a tin drum. Where’s the struggle, the sweat, the soul? Fans revel in transforming Trump into a Totoro or Disaster Girl into a Chihiro [10], but it’s a conjurer’s trick - borrowing a master’s cloak without earning the scars. The ethical rift gapes: does this flood of faux-Ghibli dilute the real, turning art into a commodity, a meme to be flicked aside?

It’s not just Miyazaki’s legacy at stake - it’s the idea of authenticity. When AI mimics, it flattens; every image carries Ghibli’s sheen but none of its weight. Over 4,000 artists and filmmakers signed an open letter in March 2025, begging Christie’s to nix an AI art sale, crying “exploitation” of human craft [4]. They’re not wrong - there’s a vampiric edge to it, a machine feasting on the living to ape their dance. Pratchett might grin at the irony: a golem outpacing its maker, all cogs and no conscience. Peterson would mourn the loss of meaning, the erosion of what makes art a mirror to our depths.

5.5 - A Mirror to the Age

This Ghibli gambit mirrors our age - a tug-of-war between progress and principle. AI’s promise dazzles: art for all, unbound by talent’s yoke. Yet its shadow looms: a world where creation’s cheap, where the human hand fades to a whisper. Peterson might cast it as civilization’s test - will we guard the sacred flame, or let it gutter in the machine’s wind? Pratchett’d spin a yarn of a world overrun by art-golems, charming till they clog the streets.

There’s no tidy fix. Licensing could salve the wound - imagine Studio Ghibli striking a deal, letting fans play while artists profit [17]. Opt-out rights might shield creators, as over 400 filmmakers demanded in their anti-AI salvo [4]. Or perhaps we lean into chaos, letting AI flood the canvas till only the truest art stands tall. Each path carries a cost: to the artist’s soul, the fan’s joy, or the law’s frail order.

5.4 - The Fan’s Feast vs. The Creator’s Fast

Yet flip the coin, and there’s the fan’s feast - undeniable, radiant. This trend isn’t malice; it’s love, a chorus of voices singing Ghibli’s tune in new keys [41]. Kouka Webb reimagined her wedding photos as Ghibli scenes, a memory gilded with whimsy [8]. X posts brim with glee: historical photos, pets, even mundane selfies reborn as anime dreams [5]. It’s democratized delight, a rebellion against the gatekeepers of skill. Who dares call that theft? It’s a tribute, a thousand hands reaching for Miyazaki’s magic - albeit through a silicon wand.

Here’s the rub: this joy teeters on an ethical tightrope. OpenAI’s tool, trained on untold troves (perhaps Ghibli’s own?), sidesteps consent [11]. The fan’s glee rests on a shadow bargain - artistry pillaged without a nod. Shouldn’t creators at least get a bow, a coin, a say? The EU AI Act nudges at this, demanding training data transparency [27], but America’s freewheeling ethos shrugs [34]. China labels AI outputs, a nod to clarity [32], yet the ethical core festers: if the muse is borrowed, who pays the muse’s keep?

5.6 - The Final Jest

In the end, the ethical abyss yawns wide. Miyazaki’s disgust - “an insult to life” - still rings like a bell, a warning against surrendering the human soul to silicon sleight-of-hand. Yet the fans' laughter echoes too, joyful and loud, a hymn to shared wonder.

This was never just about Ghibli. It’s about us - our tools, our culture, our spark. The machine churns on, tireless and oblivious, a merry trickster in a drama it doesn't understand.

We stand again at that same old crossroads: genius or theft, homage or heist. Will we tame the beast, feed it, or let it devour the very thing we call creation?

That’s the riddle now—still unanswered—as the Ghibli-fied world spins merrily into the void.

6 - References

[1] TechCrunch, “ChatGPT’s image-generation feature gets an upgrade,” March 25, 2025
https://techcrunch.com/2025/03/25/chatgpts-image-generation-feature-gets-an-upgrade/

[2] VentureBeat, “Studio Ghibli AI image trend overwhelms OpenAI’s new GPT-4o feature, delaying free tier,” March 2025
https://venturebeat.com/ai/studio-ghibli-ai-image-trend-overwhelms-openais-new-gpt-4o-feature-delaying-free-tier/

[3] AP News, “ChatGPT’s viral Studio Ghibli-style images highlight AI copyright concerns,” March 27, 2025
https://apnews.com/article/studio-ghibli-chatgpt-images-hayao-miyazaki-openai-0f4cb487ec3042dd5b43ad47879b91f4

[4] Variety, “OpenAI CEO Responds to ChatGPT Users Creating Studio Ghibli-Style AI Images,” March 2025
https://variety.com/2025/digital/news/openai-ceo-chatgpt-studio-ghibli-ai-images-1236349141/

[5] NBC News, “Studio Ghibli-inspired memes and portraits made with ChatGPT are flooding the internet,” March 2025
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/studio-ghibli-chatgpt-inspired-memes-portraits-rcna198273

[6] The Times of India, “How to create Ghibli-style portraits without paying for ChatGPT Plus,” March 2025
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/how-to-create-ghibli-style-portraits-without-paying-for-chatgpt-plus/articleshow/119581346.cms

[7] Gizmodo, “ChatGPT’s Studio Ghibli AI Art Trend Is an Insult to Life Itself,” March 2025
https://gizmodo.com/open-ai-ghibli-trend-miyazaki-chatgpt-2000581679

[8] The New York Times, “ChatGPT’s Studio Ghibli Style Animations Are Almost Too Good,” March 27, 2025
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/27/style/ai-chatgpt-studio-ghibli.html

[9] Hollywood Reporter, “Artists Lose First Round of Copyright Infringement Case Against AI Art Generators,” October 31, 2023
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/artists-copyright-infringement-case-ai-art-generators-1235632929/

[10] TechCrunch, “OpenAI’s viral Studio Ghibli moment highlights AI copyright concerns,” March 26, 2025
https://techcrunch.com/2025/03/26/openais-viral-studio-ghibli-moment-highlights-ai-copyright-concerns/

[11] Built In, “AI and Copyright Law: What We Know,” 2025
https://builtin.com/artificial-intelligence/ai-copyright

[12] The Washington Post, “AI copyright lawsuit hinges on the legal concept of ‘fair use’,” January 4, 2024
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/01/04/nyt-ai-copyright-lawsuit-fair-use/

[13] Copyright Alliance, “Current AI Copyright Cases – Part 1,” March 30, 2023
https://copyrightalliance.org/current-ai-copyright-cases-part-1/

[14] The Independent, “ChatGPT’s Studio Ghibli AI trend sparks debate over creativity vs copyright violation,” March 28, 2025
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/studio-ghibli-chatgpt-openai-hayao-miyazaki-trend-copyright-b2723114.html

[15] Business Insider, “Studio Ghibli Has Few Legal Moves Against OpenAI ChatGPT Image Feature,” March 28, 2025
https://www.businessinsider.com/studio-ghibli-openai-chatgpt-image-feature-copyright-law-2025-3

[16] Center for Art Law, “Art-istic or Art-ificial? Ownership and copyright concerns in AI-generated artwork,” November 21, 2022
https://itsartlaw.org/2022/11/21/artistic-or-artificial-ai/

[17] Futurism, “Lawyer Says Studio Ghibli Could Take Legal Action Against OpenAI,” March 28, 2025
https://futurism.com/lawyer-studio-ghibli-legal-action-openai

[18] Perkins Coie, “Recent Rulings in AI Copyright Lawsuits Shed Some Light, but Leave Many Questions,” December 14, 2023
https://perkinscoie.com/insights/update/recent-rulings-ai-copyright-lawsuits-shed-some-light-leave-many-questions

[19] Reuters, “AI-generated art cannot receive copyrights, US court says,” August 21, 2023
https://www.reuters.com/legal/ai-generated-art-cannot-receive-copyrights-us-court-says-2023-08-21/

[20] Copyright Alliance, “Insights from Court Orders in AI Copyright Infringement Cases,” December 12, 2024
https://copyrightalliance.org/ai-copyright-infringement-cases-insights/

[21] Supreme Court, Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., 593 U.S. ___ (2021)
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/18-956_d18f.pdf

[22] Perkins Coie, “Fair Use Defense Failed in Thomson Reuters v. Ross—But the Jury Is Still Out for Generative AI,” February 13, 2025.
https://perkinscoie.com/insights/update/fair-use-defense-failed-thomson-reuters-v-ross-jury-still-out-generative-ai

[23] Second Circuit, Authors Guild v. Google, Inc., 804 F.3d 202 (2015)
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/13-4829/13-4829-2015-10-16.html

[24] IU News, “Ask the Expert: What are legal issues surrounding AI, its impact on the arts?” 2025
https://news.iu.edu/live/news/31782-ask-the-expert-what-are-legal-issues-surrounding-ai-it

[25] Business Insider, “OpenAI Cracked Down on Requests for Studio Ghibli-Style Images,” March 2025
https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-chatgpt-studio-ghibli-style-images-generation-grok-claude-genai-2025-3

[26] ScoreDetect Blog, “Can You Copyright AI Art: Legal Insights,” 2025
https://www.scoredetect.com/blog/posts/can-you-copyright-ai-art-legal-insights

[27] European Parliament, “EU AI Act: first regulation on artificial intelligence,” July 12, 2024
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20240308IPR19015/artificial-intelligence-act-meps-adopt-landmark-law

[28] KEA, “EU AI Act: shaping Copyright compliance in the age of AI Innovation,” March 14, 2024
https://keanet.eu/eu-ai-act-shaping-copyright-compliance-in-the-age-of-ai-innovation/

[29] The Guardian, “EU accused of leaving ‘devastating’ copyright loophole in AI Act,” February 19, 2025
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/feb/19/eu-accused-of-leaving-devastating-copyright-loophole-in-ai-act

[30] USC IP & Tech Law Society, “AI, Copyright, and the Law: The Ongoing Battle,” February 4, 2025
https://sites.usc.edu/iptls/2025/02/04/ai-copyright-and-the-law-the-ongoing-battle-over-intellectual-property-rights/

[31] LinkedIn, “AI Regulation: A Comparative Analysis of Approaches in the US, EU, and China,” July 14, 2023
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ai-regulation-comparative-analysis-approaches-us-eu-china-markevich/

[32] Linklaters, “China: First AI output copyright infringement case,” April 3, 2024
https://techinsights.linklaters.com/post/102j4cb/china-first-ai-output-copyright-infringement-case

[33] Transcend, “Global AI Regulation: A Closer Look at the US, EU, and China,” October 19, 2023
https://transcend.io/blog/ai-regulation

[34] RAND, “Artificial Intelligence Impacts on Copyright Law,” November 20, 2024
https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA3243-1.html

[35] Copyright Alliance, “AI and Copyright Law in 2023: Federal Government Activities,” January 3, 2024
https://copyrightalliance.org/ai-copyright-federal-government-activities/

[36] U.S. Copyright Office, “Copyright and Artificial Intelligence,” ongoing reports as of 2025
https://www.copyright.gov/ai/

[37] Japan Today, “Copyright questions loom as ChatGPT’s Ghibli-style images go viral,” March 27, 2025
https://japantoday.com/category/tech/copyright-questions-loom-as-chatgpt%27s-ghibli-style-images-go-viral

[38] CNN, “ChatGPT: Viral Studio Ghibli-style AI images showcase power – and copyright concerns,” March 27, 2025
https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/27/style/chatgpt-studio-ghibli-ai-images-intl-hnk

[39] User on X, AI Engineer Hub (@AIEngineerHub), “Why pay $500 for a Miyazaki-esque sketch when ChatGPT does it for $20 a month?” March 31, 2025
https://x.com/AIEngineerHub/status/1906503482267292058

[40] Authors Guild, “AI Survey: 90% of Writers Believe Authors Should Be Compensated for AI Training Use,” October 2023
https://authorsguild.org/news/ai-survey-90-percent-of-writers-believe-authors-should-be-compensated-for-ai-training-use

[41] Forbes, “The ChatGPT 4o Studio Ghibli AI Trend Is The Ultimate Heartbreak,” March 27, 2025
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2025/03/27/the-chatgpt-4o-studio-ghibli-ai-trend-is-the-ultimate-heartbreak/