The former studies AI-related artistic practices and their institutional, social and technical contexts. The latter uses computational methods to analyse, retrieve or attribute artworks. They may overlap, but their questions and evidence differ. This archive’s genealogy and event records primarily approach the former, reading technical accounts alongside concrete artistic actions.
View full image ↗Cover illustration for Cybernetic Serendipity Music (1968), a record produced for the exhibition, preserving its original typography and score graphics.
ICA / Cybernetic Serendipity archive
Source · Cybernetic Serendipity exhibition ↗Related cases & evidence
These cases provide material for comparison and verification; no single source substantiates every claim in the guide.
Boris Eldagsen / PSEUDOMNESIA award-refusal intervention ↗
Research is ongoing; collected events do not constitute a complete case history.
View full image ↗Boris Eldagsen, PSEUDOMNESIA: The Electrician (2022), reproduced on the artist’s account of declining the 2023 photography award.
© Boris Eldagsen; artist’s website
Source · Sony World Photography Awards 2023: artist’s account ↗Christie’s / Augmented Intelligence and open letter ↗
Collected events and documents are linked in the timeline; the case history remains under research.
View full image ↗An illustrative image of Alexander Reben’s Untitled Robot Painting, published in Christie’s sale announcement on 7 February 2025.
Alexander Reben; image source: Christie’s
Source · Augmented Intelligence sale announcement ↗Zarya of the Dawn / Review of comic copyright scope ↗
Research is ongoing; collected events do not constitute a complete case history.
View full image ↗Kristina’s Zarya of the Dawn. Reproduced in Chen Haohao’s 2023 commentary.
Rights retained by original creators; reproduction source: Chen Haohao’s 2023 commentary
Source · Disco and AI: Is the Movement Against AI a New Luddism? ↗Procreate / Statement against introducing generative AI ↗
Research is ongoing; collected events do not constitute a complete case history.
View full image ↗An image of digital drawing from Procreate’s statement against introducing generative AI.
Procreate / Savage Interactive; rights retained by source
Source · Procreate’s position on AI ↗Connecticut provenance duties for large generative-AI providers take effect ↗
Section 15 of Public Act 26-15 takes effect on 1 October 2026. It imposes provenance duties on covered providers of generative-AI systems with over one million monthly users that are publicly accessible for personal use by Connecticut consumers. It concerns generated or materially altered audio, images and video, subject to commercial and technical reasonableness.
Read the case, chronology & documents ↗ArtStation / NoAI ↗
This batch includes platform announcements on NoAI, content filtering, and anti-scraping measures; the protest’s beginning still requires evidence.
View full image ↗The anti-AI movement on ArtStation. Reproduced in Chen Haohao’s 2023 commentary.
Rights retained by original creators; reproduction source: Chen Haohao’s 2023 commentary
Source · Disco and AI: Is the Movement Against AI a New Luddism? ↗Statement on AI Training / Cross-disciplinary sign-on against unlicensed training ↗
Research is ongoing; collected events do not constitute a complete case history.
View full image ↗Image published with “Statement on AI training — Ed Newton-Rex”. Its creation date is not inferred from the event date in this record.
Image source: Ed Newton-Rex; rights remain with the original rights holders.
Source · Statement on AI training — Ed Newton-Rex ↗SAG-AFTRA / Video-game performers’ labour dispute ↗
Collected events and documents are linked in the timeline; the case history remains under research.
View full image ↗SAG-AFTRA video game performers’ strike graphic, July 2024, preserved in contemporaneous coverage by 2x2.media.
SAG-AFTRA; reproduction source: 2x2.media
Source · SAG-AFTRA begins a strike against video game companies ↗Brazil’s Dublagem Viva / Dubbing and AI regulation ↗
Collected events and documents are linked in the timeline; the case history remains under research.
View full image ↗Public hearing on AI regulation in dubbing at Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies, 29 August 2024. Photograph by Bruno Spada.
Bruno Spada / Câmara dos Deputados
Source · Dubbing workers call for protection against unauthorised AI voice use ↗NOMORE Unauthorized Generative AI / Japanese voice actors’ video campaign ↗
Collected events and documents are linked in the timeline; the case history remains under research.
View full image ↗A montage of participating voice performers published on the NOMORE Unauthorised Generative AI campaign website.
NOMORE Unauthorised Generative AI campaign; rights retained by source
Source · NOMORE Unauthorised Generative AI campaign ↗Glaze / Defensive tool for artists ↗
Collected events and documents are linked in the timeline; the case history remains under research.
View full image ↗A work by Karla Ortiz shown on the Glaze project website as a Glazed example.
© Karla Ortiz; source: University of Chicago Glaze project
Source · Glaze: project description and examples ↗Nightshade / Defensive tool for creators ↗
Collected events and documents are linked in the timeline; the case history remains under research.
View full image ↗A treated work by Yujin Choo displayed as an example on the Nightshade project website.
© Yujin Choo; source: University of Chicago Nightshade project
Source · Nightshade: project description and examples ↗IMPF and IMPEL publish principles for fair generative-AI licensing ↗
On 30 September 2026, IMPF and IMPEL proposed principles for generative-AI music licensing. They distinguish payments for past uses, training, generated outputs and future exploitation, and call for rightsholder involvement in scope and valuation. This is an industry negotiating framework, not a concluded collective licence or a statutory tariff.
View full image ↗Title area of page 1 of the IMPF and IMPEL joint statement, 30 September 2026. Cropped from the original PDF; lettering is unchanged.
IMPF / IMPEL; official original document
Source · Joint Statement: IMPEL and IMPF on Fair Licensing for Generative AI ↗Third Circuit affirms the ROSS copyright and fair-use ruling ↗
In case 25-2153, the Third Circuit affirmed the copyright and fair-use ruling concerning 2,243 Westlaw headnotes. The opinion records a filing date of 29 September 2026; the court’s public list records the case on 30 September. The dispute concerns protected summaries used for a competing legal-search system. The ROSS system at issue was not generative AI.
View full image ↗First page of the Third Circuit opinion in the ROSS appeal, No. 25-2153, filed 29 September 2026.
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit; official original document
Source · Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GMBH; West Publishing Corp v. Ross Intelligence Inc., No. 25-2153 ↗SAG-AFTRA / 2023 screen strike and digital replicas ↗
This case contains three dated events; see the timeline. Original documents, parties’ responses, and subsequent developments are still being collected.
View full image ↗Striking actors and writers in Los Angeles on 17 July 2023. This photograph documents the strike, not the November agreement.
Photograph: Benoît Prieur; Wikimedia Commons; CC0 1.0
Source · Striking actors and writers in LA, July 2023 ↗Beijing AI-generated voice / Voice actor’s personality-rights case ↗
Collected events and documents are linked in the timeline; the case history remains under research.
View full image ↗Image published with “Beijing Internet Court issues first-instance judgment in AI-generated voice personality-rights case”. Its creation date is not inferred from the event date in this record.
Image source: Beijing High People’s Court, Jingfa Wangshi; supplied by Beijing Internet Court and published through The Paper’s government channel; rights remain with the original rights holders.
Source · Beijing Internet Court issues first-instance judgment in AI-generated voice personality-rights case ↗Maryland AI and deepfake identity-fraud amendments take effect ↗
SB 8 / Chapter 445, approved on 12 May 2026, takes effect on 1 October and amends Criminal Law §8-301. It brings specified AI and deepfake conduct within identity-fraud rules. The relevant prohibition requires knowing, wilful conduct and fraudulent intent, addressing harmful impersonation and specified false-record practices rather than generally banning AI art or stylistic imitation.
Read the case, chronology & documents ↗Original sources
Artist signatories of the open letter · EN
Read original source ↗United States Copyright Office · EN
Read original source ↗Connecticut General Assembly · EN
Read original source ↗Câmara dos Deputados · PT
Read original source ↗Câmara dos Deputados · PT
Read original source ↗Volunteer voice actors’ group · JA
Read original source ↗Glaze research team / USENIX · EN
Read original source ↗Shawn Shan and others / arXiv · EN
Read original source ↗United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · EN
Read original source ↗United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · EN
Read original source ↗Beijing High People’s Court, Jingfa Wangshi; supplied by Beijing Internet Court and published through The Paper’s government channel · ZH
Read original source ↗Maryland General Assembly · EN
Read original source ↗Maryland General Assembly · EN
Read original source ↗This research guide is written by the archive. Its Chinese and English texts may include AI-assisted translations and may not yet have received independent human review. Check historical claims and rights information against the original-language sources.
Citation & methodology
This topic is a selection and reading path, not an exhaustive history. Cite the relevant record and original source for specific claims. To cite this guide, give its title, URL and access date.
ANTI-AI ARCHIVE. How does AI art history differ from using AI to study art history?. https://salondesrefuses.cn/en/topics/culture-governance/guides/history
Methodology & citation ↗