AGD explains why it did not sign KI aber fair

The archive provides Chinese and English research texts. Translations may be AI-assisted and may not yet have received independent human review. Consult the original-language sources alongside them.

AGD said it did not sign because the text’s problem framing and policy demands were too general. It advocated discussion of designers’ opportunities, risks, and professional training in AI use, and also expressed interest in disclosure of training materials.

Image published with “Our position on AI, but fair”. Its creation date is not inferred from the event date in this record.
Image source: Allianz Deutscher Designer (AGD); rights remain with the original rights holders.
Source · Our position on AI, but fair ↗

Sources read · Research in progress

What changed

RESEARCH NOTE

Declining to sign does not mean endorsing unauthorised training. Its objection that small payments might entrench the problem is retained as organisational opinion.

Editorial research question

Editorial interpretation: preserves differences within a profession over training permission, remuneration, and technological adaptation, without merging all creators’ organisations into one anti-AI camp.

This is an editorial interpretation or question, separate from factual statements.

Evidence & sources

SRC-0206

Lines 5–38: date, author, reasons for not signing, and training and policy views.

SRC-0206

Our position on AI, but fair

Allianz Deutscher Designer (AGD) · DE · 2023-04-14

Case

CASE-0124KI aber fair / German creative associations’ licensing demands and AGD’s refusal to sign

Cite this record

ANTI-AI ARCHIVE. “AGD explains why it did not sign KI aber fair.” evt-0209. Include this page’s URL and your access date when citing.