PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.
Run a Free PC Scan →Free scan · Windows 10 & 11
ThatPainter is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Learn More
Scarlett Johansson, R.E.M. and hundreds of other creative signatories have backed Stealing Isn’t Innovation, a campaign calling for permission, licensing, stronger rights enforcement and an opt-out from using creative work to train generative AI. Its “theft” language is an accusation about alleged practices, not a court ruling that AI training is categorically illegal.
What is the Stealing Isn’t Innovation campaign?
The campaign argues that creative work should not be used to develop generative-AI systems without authorization or payment. Its proposed remedies center on obtaining permission and negotiating licenses or partnerships, enforcing creators’ rights, and allowing creators to opt out of training uses. It is not framed as a demand to stop all AI development; it calls for development on terms that respect creative work and rights holders.
#1 Best Overall
Engadget reported more than 700 signatories when the campaign launched on January 22, 2026, including Johansson and members of R.E.M. That is a launch-period figure, not a verified count of current signatories. The signatories come from multiple creative fields; the available reporting does not establish a complete signatory list or identify a particular campaign spokesperson.
What does “AI slop and theft” mean for painters?
For painters and other visual artists, the campaign’s concern is that existing creative work may be used as training material without the artist’s authorization or compensation. The related phrase “AI slop” points to concerns about mass-produced synthetic output. Those objections connect in public debate, but they are different questions: one concerns how a system was trained, while the other concerns the volume or character of what it generates.
The campaign’s characterization of alleged unauthorized use as “theft at a grand scale” is advocacy language, not a legal finding. The sources cited in launch coverage do not establish which specific paintings or other works appeared in particular AI training datasets. Nor does the campaign’s position, by itself, settle the legal status of any specific use.
Why is Scarlett Johansson part of the story?
Johansson’s role in the campaign comes alongside a separate dispute about voice and identity. In May 2024, she objected to the ChatGPT voice Sky after she had declined an offer to lend her voice. The Associated Press reported that Johansson described the released demo as “eerily similar” to her voice. OpenAI said Sky was voiced by a different professional actress and was not intended to resemble Johansson. SAG-AFTRA said it shared her concerns about clarity and transparency and supported protection against unauthorized digital replication.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
That episode concerns the use or apparent imitation of a person’s voice. It is relevant to broader consent concerns, but it is distinct from the campaign’s challenge to the use of creative works as training inputs. A voice-imitation dispute does not establish what material was used to train a model.
What is established about AI training and copyright?
The U.S. Copyright Office’s AI initiative examines questions that include copyright in AI-generated works and the use of copyrighted material in AI training. Its existence shows that these questions are under active examination; it is not a blanket ruling that all such training is lawful or unlawful. The sources discussed here do not resolve the merits of any particular training-data dispute.
It helps to keep three issues separate:
- Training inputs: whether works were used to develop a model, and whether that use was authorized or legally permissible.
- Imitation of identity: whether generated material imitates someone’s voice or likeness without permission.
- Generated output: whether an output is misleading, low quality or otherwise objectionable.
They can overlap, but evidence or a policy response concerning one does not automatically answer the others.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What responses exist on platforms?
Spotify offers a specific music-platform example, not a universal industry standard or a complete response to the campaign’s training-data demands.
Voice impersonation
Spotify’s support policy says music that impersonates an artist’s voice without permission can be removed, including music made with AI voice cloning. This addresses certain generated outputs and identity concerns; it does not, by itself, settle whether works were authorized as training inputs.
Reporting, review and credit disclosures
In a September 25, 2025 newsroom announcement, Spotify described expanded reporting for artists, work on content-mismatch review, and disclosures for AI contributions in music credits when labels or distributors supply that information. These are Spotify’s stated policies and tools. They should not be read as requirements that apply to every platform, nor as proof that every AI contribution will be disclosed.
What the campaign is asking artists and AI developers to consider
The campaign’s proposals focus on permission, compensation, enforceable rights and creator choice in training uses. Its wider concerns also touch on transparency and identity when AI-generated work imitates a person. For painters, the central distinction is whether a proposal governs the use of artwork as training material, the production of a particular output, or both. The campaign’s broader demand for consent and licensing concerns training inputs; a rule against unauthorized voice impersonation, such as Spotify’s, addresses a narrower output issue.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
