Answerman

Anime and AI

A reader asks:

“Recently there is a trend on social media to create, share and display AI-generated imagery that looks like it came from the Studio Ghibili films, and some of it quite controversial. Meanwhile! Some others seem to be cashing in on the hype by using the Ghibli image generator to create funny or satirical posts, or to become a trend on the internet. Do you think that this kind of technology can do more harm than good, or the other way around? Should Studio Ghibili sue OpenAI, the company that owns ChatGPT by issuing a lawsuit for copyright infringement or plagiarism of their works? And what's your opinion about this?”

OpenAI's launch of GPT-4o native image generation on March 25, 2025 created a viral moment when users discovered they could generate remarkably accurate Studio Ghibli-style artwork with simple text prompts. The internet exploded with "Ghiblified" versions of everything from Turkish Olympic shooters to the infamous "Disaster Girl" meme. Even OpenAI CEO Sam Altman joined the "fun," changing his profile picture to a Ghibli-style portrait.

The trend was so massive that OpenAI had to delay rollout to free-tier users because their servers couldn't handle the demand. Beneath the jokesy surface lies a complex web of legal, ethical, and artistic concerns that could fundamentally reshape how we think about creative ownership in the AI age.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'll never get used to the official White House account on X becoming one of the world's most popular shit-posting destinations. They also got in on the action by resharing a Ghibli-style image of a weeping Dominican woman recently arrested by ICE, a thoughtless act that diminishes both the genius of a true master and displays their indifference to human suffering. Like most AI, it just looks bad.

For me, this generative AI tool that directly mimics Miyazaki's art style is a desecration of something important, timeless, and fragile. It is a good case study for why we should be cautious about adopting AI tools for art. Both as consumers and as creators.

As consumers, the adoption of the Gibli image generator was a pointless exercise in “Look at me, look at me!” early 21st Century vapidity and narcissism. “Hey guys! I just used as much energy as a thousand suns to make my cat look like Totoro.” Like I said. It is a bad look, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I believe AI isn't worth adopting for the creation of art, especially animation, and especially if you know what the heck you are doing.

We will get onto that shortly, but first, we need to talk about the legal implications, because the copyright issues exist in equally murky waters. Traditional copyright law protects specific works, but not artistic "styles." Studio Ghibli's frames and films are protected, but the broader aesthetic, soft watercolors, expressive eyes, and whimsical character designs operate in a legal gray area. Modern societal norms are disintegrating before our eyes. Technology moves fast and recklessly, but the law moves very slowly.

Legal experts suggest Studio Ghibli could have viable claims under multiple theories. When ChatGPT references "Ghibli style" in prompts, it's arguably trading on their trademark. More significantly, the only way AI could generate such convincing Ghibli-style artwork is by training on thousands of frames from actual Studio Ghibli films without permission (or compensation). Considering how long it took Ghibli to even agree to allow their films to be available via streaming, or for a 4K restoration to be released, is it any surprise? As a brand, they seem quite suspicious of new digital technologies that disrupt the art and the business of anime.

So what does Miyazaki think? Many claimed he'd "gone on the record" in 2016 to damn AI-generated art as "an insult to life itself." Only! He wasn't referring to generative AI image generators; he was discussing entirely different animation software.

Miyazaki has not made any public comments since the ChatGPT trend began in March 2025, nor is he likely to. Japanese firms aren't litigious, especially regarding "overseas business." Perhaps the Disney lawsuit against Midjourney will force AI companies to get their house in order when it comes to respecting creators.

I haven't heard many good arguments for why Gen-AI is beneficial for artistic expression or the creative industries. Perhaps it's because so few of us are adopting AI tools yet. What seems apparent is that those shouting loudest about AI benefits are the ones building and selling it, not writers, artists, and animators. However! That doesn't mean it won't be a net positive for animation's future. How will we know if so few of us experiment with these tools?

ChatGPT mentions the democratization of artistic creation, but I prefer the term “accessibility.” Some of the best animators I know started in their bedrooms drawing comics and learning how to storyboard and animate from “How To” training books before eventually moving into formal academic training and studio apprenticeships. This is important.

I recently watched the animated music promo for the song “A Love Letter to LA” (Cuco), which is created by animation director Paul Trillo and his team at Asteria Studio, who used hundreds of illustrations by the artist, Paul Flores and utilized an “ethical generation AI” toolset for some of the production pipeline. The final result gave me some hope for the future, and I am incredibly curious about what the Japanese animation industry may devise in time with a similar approach. If you are sloppy, or have an “untrained eye” it is likely your prompts will produce slop. AI is a precise tool that requires a trained mind to get the best out of it. I cannot stress this enough. You need to know how animation is made to know how to create great animation, even in AI.

People who haven't learned to animate, who lack a trained eye for the "performance" element integral to quality animation, and who don't understand post-production mastery, generally don't create beautiful animation. However! Could creating their first animated short via AI prompts be the difference between a promising young animator finding their first steps?

Another AI demo shows how Blender can now be controlled via Claude AI for prompt-assisted 3D modeling. This is what I mean by "accessibility:" AI helping animators access and learn new tools at very little cost. AI will aid skills-based learning for inquisitive creatives.

I've highlighted some of the potential positives of AI in animation, but it would be remiss of me not to also discuss the downsides. Of which, there are many. AI potentially devalues human artistry and threatens the livelihoods of professional artists. This is all but certain, but how do you frame this as a negative if you create anime? Demand for anime is higher than it's ever been, with the past decade alone producing more anime content than the prior several decades before it, but with fewer than 6,000 domestic animators left, how will they keep up with demand?

The average production budget for a TV half-hour of anime is about $300,000 per episode. This is not a lot, when compared to the USA or Europe, where the budget can easily be double this. The people who pay for anime content (Production Planning Committees and global streamers) don't want these costs to increase, so where are all of the new animators going to come from? China or Korea? I don't think so. Both countries have been huge service providers to Japan, but they're now pivoting away from a “service studio mindset” into a “creative studio mindset,” and they should. They have amazing IP they can adapt (web comics, light novels, manhwa etc), and their stuff is starting to become more and more popular globally. What will Japan do?

Once AI workflows become common in anime studios, we'll see improved quality and consistency, but also reduced animator numbers. The highest-skilled will remain vital, while juniors may become redundant and others may find their ascent to key frame animation is turbo-charged.

Studio Ghibli has been notably silent, though they confirmed a viral cease-and-desist letter was fake. Their restraint might be strategic, copyright litigation is expensive and unpredictable. Meanwhile! The legal landscape around AI training is still evolving.

This controversy represents more than one studio's IP concerns. It's a test case for whether human creativity can survive algorithmic reproduction. If courts side with AI companies, we're headed toward a future where any artistic style can be instantly replicated without consent.

My prediction? Studio Ghibli will eventually take legal action either directly or as part of a class action brought by multiple creators, brands, and copyright owners. The stakes are too high to ignore. Whether they win will likely determine the future relationship between human creativity and AI.

Make no mistake. AI is here, getting smarter, and coming for many jobs, even if subtitle translation is still sketchy at best. The one thing I want to convey: explore AI tools and play with them. Being someone who can use AI for excellent outcomes is more valuable than someone who cannot. Apart from a plumber. An AI will never unclog your lavatory.

Do YOU have a question for the Answerman?

We'd love to answer your questions and especially encourage questions inspired by recent news and headlines. However, READ THIS FIRST:
● CHECK THE ARCHIVES. Over the years, we've answered THOUSANDS of questions and might have already answered yours!
● We cannot tell you if or when a show will get another season, nor can we help you get in touch with any producers, artists, creators, actors, or licensors.
● Only submit your question once.
● We take questions by email only. (Tweeted questions get ignored!)
● Please keep your questions within a paragraph length.
●The email address is [email protected].

Thank you!