From Totoro to Algorithms: AI, Art, and some legal questions
Studio Ghibli, with its breathtaking artistry and deeply evocative storytelling, has enchanted audiences for decades. Its hand-drawn animations, suffused with whimsy and human depth, have become a hallmark of animation excellence. Meanwhile, OpenAI's cutting-edge technology is democratizing creativity, allowing users to replicate intricate artistic styles, including the Ghibli aesthetic, at the click of a button. This convergence, however, raises complex questions about copyright, intellectual property, and the nature of art itself.[i]
The internet is awash with Ghibli-inspired content, much of it born out of AI.[ii] Imagine a vivid rendering of a serene countryside, complete with golden fields swaying in the wind, reminiscent of the idyllic landscapes in My Neighbour Totoro (1988). Such images, although generated by algorithms, capture the essence of Totoro’s lush rural setting—a place brimming with nostalgia and wonder.[iii]
Platforms like OpenAI’s image-generation tools have enabled users—artists and enthusiasts alike—to produce these striking visuals within seconds. This accessibility has fuelled a viral trend on social media,[iv] where hashtags like #GhibliAI or #AIArt bring countless examples of digital works that echo the ethereal beauty of Spirited Away’s (2001) dreamlike bathhouse or the magical skies from Howl’s Moving Castle (2004). While many see this as a celebration of the beloved studio, there are undeniable tensions simmering beneath the surface.[v]
The heart of the issue lies in the legal framework—or the lack thereof—surrounding AI-generated content. Studio Ghibli, like many other creative entities, has closely guarded its intellectual property over the years. But what happens when AI mimics, rather than duplicates, their style?
The primary question is whether AI-generated art violates copyright law. While Studio Ghibli's individual works—such as the intricate townscape from Kiki’s Delivery Service (1989) or the fantastical castle in Castle in the Sky (1986)—are protected, the mimicry of their aesthetic style occupies a grey area.[vi] Current copyright laws do not explicitly cover artistic styles, leaving creators and legal experts divided on whether such works constitute infringement.[vii]
Another legal flashpoint arises when AI-generated works are marketed or monetized. For instance, imagine a situation where an AI-created poster features a creature resembling No-Face from Spirited Away. Unauthorized use of the character or referencing it as “Ghibli-inspired” in promotions could infringe upon Studio Ghibli’s trademarks, misleading consumers and diluting the studio’s carefully cultivated identity.[viii] Supporters of AI art often invoke fair use, arguing that these creations are transformative rather than derivative. However, fair use assessments are highly context-dependent, considering factors such as the purpose of use and its effect on the original work’s market. Does an AI’s replication of Ghibli’s style count as transformative, or does it merely exploit an established visual language for convenience?[ix] The jury is still out.[x]
Few filmmakers have been as vocal in their opposition to AI as Hayao Miyazaki, Studio Ghibli’s legendary co-founder. In a now-famous interview, Miyazaki condemned AI in animation, describing it as “an insult to life itself.”[xi] His critique points to a deeper, more philosophical debate: Can AI truly honour the soul of human artistry?[xii]
One ethical concern centres on the potential devaluation of human labour. Consider the elaborate hand-drawn food scenes in Ponyo (2008), where every noodle, every egg yolk is depicted with painstaking care. These moments, a testament to the animator’s devotion, risk being overshadowed when AI-generated replicas emerge with ease. Does this diminish the value of such craftsmanship in the public eye?[xiii] AI's accessibility also opens the door to misuse. Imagine Ghibli-style visuals being used to create harmful or inappropriate content. Such scenarios could tarnish the studio’s reputation and undermine its legacy, emphasizing the need for responsible use of AI tools.[xiv]
Above all, Studio Ghibli’s works resonate because they are deeply human. They explore universal themes of love, loss, and wonder—whether it’s the heartwarming sisterly bond in My Neighbour Totoro or the poignant environmental message in Princess Mononoke (1997). While AI can imitate the aesthetic surface, it cannot replicate the emotional depth that defines Ghibli’s storytelling. This raises an essential question: Are we diminishing the human connection by outsourcing creativity to machines?[xv]
As AI-generated content becomes more prevalent, the need for robust legal and ethical frameworks is increasingly urgent. Several high-profile lawsuits[xvi] have already highlighted the tensions between technology companies and creative industries.[xvii] For example, OpenAI has faced scrutiny over its training methods, with critics alleging that the datasets used for AI development often include copyrighted material without explicit consent. While these cases primarily concern text-based AI, they have significant implications for visual art as well. A legal precedent addressing copyright in AI-generated art could profoundly shape the industry’s future.[xviii]
Moreover, regulatory bodies must grapple with the dual challenge of fostering innovation while protecting intellectual property. Policymakers, artists, and technologists must collaborate to develop standards that balance these competing interests. This could include licensing agreements for datasets, transparency in AI development, and stronger safeguards against misuse.[xix]
The Studio Ghibli trend exemplifies the dual-edged nature of AI in the creative arts. On one hand, it democratizes access to sophisticated aesthetics, empowering individuals to create and share their visions. On the other, it threatens to disrupt traditional notions of authorship, originality, and artistic value.
To chart a path forward, we must embrace a collaborative approach. Artists and AI developers can work together to ensure that technology enhances rather than undermines human creativity. For instance, Studio Ghibli could partner with AI companies to create tools that complement its artists’ work, blending innovation with tradition.[xx] Policymakers, too, have a crucial role to play. By enacting clear and enforceable regulations, they can provide a framework that protects both creators and consumers. Public discourse, meanwhile, should continue to grapple with these questions, fostering a collective understanding of what we value in art and why.[xxi]
The Studio Ghibli trend is a testament to the enduring allure of the studio’s artistry, even in the age of AI. Yet, it also challenges us to think deeply about the future of creativity. Can technology replicate the soul of human expression, or does it risk hollowing out the very essence of art? As we navigate this uncharted territory, let us remember Miyazaki’s words: “Art comes from the heart.” Perhaps our ultimate task is to ensure that, no matter how advanced our tools become, they remain guided by the heart’s wisdom.[xxii]
[i] Christian Rowlands, ‘Is ChatGPT’s Studio Ghibli Craze a Copyright Timebomb? Here’s the Verdict from Expert Lawyers’, MSN Tech Radar, 4 April 2025, https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/technology/is-chatgpts-studio-ghibli-craze-a-copyright-timebomb-heres-the-verdict-from-expert-lawyers/ar-AA1Ceybd.
[ii] Vanya Garima Kachhap, ‘Ghibli Design and Pictures: What Is Ghibli? Why Is Ghibli Famous? How Does Ghibli Affect the Intellectual Property Rights?’, lawyersclubindia, 4 April 2025, https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/ghibli-design-and-pictures-what-is-ghibli-why-is-ghibli-famous-how-does-ghibli-affect-the-intellectual-property-rights--17584.asp.
[iii] Govind Choudhary, ‘Explained | The Rise of Studio Ghibli-Style AI Art: Copyright, Creativity and Controversy— What’s at Stake?’, MSN, 4 April 2025, https://www.msn.com/en-in/lifestyle/style/explained-the-rise-of-studio-ghibli-style-ai-art-copyright-creativity-and-controversy-what-s-at-stake/ar-AA1Cf3qx.
[iv] Sohu, ‘The Ghibli-Style AI Art Trend: Origin, Popularity, and Ethical Implications, Sohu, 2 April 2025, https://www.sohu.com/a/878502119_122342248.
[v] Sandeep Bangia, ‘AI-Generated Ghibli Art: A Deep Dive Into Its Ethics & Impact’, Free Press Journal, 31 March 2025, https://www.freepressjournal.in/brandsutra/ai-generated-ghibli-art-a-deep-dive-into-its-ethics-impact.
[vi] Boo and Rajvant Kaur, ‘Can You Copyright a Style? Studio Ghibli, AI Art & the Law Behind the Headlines | Omnia Law Chambers LLC’, Omnia Law Chambers LLC (blog), accessed 5 April 2025, https://omnialawchambers.com.sg/2025/04/01/can-you-copyright-a-style-studio-ghibli-ai-art-the-law-behind-the-headlines/.
[vii] The IP Press, ‘Ghibli AI Art and Copyright: The Copyright Dilemma of Ghibli Style Creations and the Looming Legal Battles Ahead’, The IP Press (blog), 31 March 2025, https://www.theippress.com/2025/03/31/ghibli-ai-art-and-copyright-the-copyright-dilemma-of-ghibli-style-creations-and-the-looming-legal-battles-ahead/.
[viii] Rowlands, ‘Is ChatGPT’s Studio Ghibli Craze a Copyright Timebomb? Here’s the Verdict from Expert Lawyers’.
[ix] Noor Bazmi, ‘OpenAI’s Ghibli-Style AI Art Is a Fine Line between Inspiration and Copyright Violation | Cryptopolitan’, Cryptopolitan, 28 March 2025, https://www.cryptopolitan.com/openais-ghibli-style-ai-art-is-a-fine-line-between-inspiration-and-copyright-violation/.
[x] Dayne Lee, ‘OpenAI’s New AI Tool Generates Ghibli-Style Art, Sparking Copyright Concerns’, MSN Tech Radar, 4 March 2025, https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/openai-s-new-ai-tool-generates-ghibli-style-art-sparking-copyright-concerns/ar-AA1C9B0u.
[xi] Vikram Murthi, ‘Hayao Miyazaki Calls Artificial Intelligence Animation “An Insult To Life Itself”’, IndieWire (blog), 13 December 2016, https://www.indiewire.com/features/general/hayao-miyazaki-artificial-intelligence-animation-insult-to-life-studio-ghibli-1201757617/.
[xii] Sohu, ‘The Impact of AI on Art: Ghibli-Style Images and Ethical Concerns_the_works_raises’, Sohu, 4 January 2025, https://www.sohu.com/a/878366020_122342248.
[xiii] The Artist Editorial, ‘The Ethical Implication Of AI Generated Art’, The Artist (blog), 28 June 2024, https://www.theartist.me/art/the-ethical-implication-of-ai-generated-art/.
[xiv] Dax Parra and Scott Stroud, ‘The Ethics of AI Art’, Center for Media Engagement, 24 February 2023, https://mediaengagement.org/research/the-ethics-of-ai-art/.
[xv] Lauren Johnson, ‘Exploring the Ethical Implications of AI-Powered Art’, Tomorrow’s World Today® (blog), 30 October 2023, https://www.tomorrowsworldtoday.com/artificial-intelligence/exploring-the-ethical-implications-of-ai-powered-art/.
[xvi] Giuseppe Ciccomascolo, ‘OpenAI Lawsuits: An Overview of ChatGPT’s Courtroom Challenges’, CCN.com, 6 August 2024, https://www.ccn.com/news/technology/openais-lawsuits-overview-courtroom-challenges/.
[xvii] Lance Eliot, ‘OpenAI Punches Upward In Bigtime Legal Copyright Lawsuit That Will Surely Determine The Future Longevity Of Generative AI’, Forbes, 7 August 2024, https://www.forbes.com/sites/lanceeliot/2024/07/08/openai-punches-upward-in-bigtime-legal-copyright-lawsuit-that-will-surely-determine-the-future-longevity-of-generative-ai/.
[xviii] Ciccomascolo, ‘OpenAI Lawsuits’.
[xix] Maxwell Zeff, ‘OpenAI’s Viral Studio Ghibli Moment Highlights AI Copyright Concerns’, MSN Tech Radar, 27 March 2025, https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/openai-s-viral-studio-ghibli-moment-highlights-ai-copyright-concerns/ar-AA1BJbHV.
[xx] Sohu, ‘The Ghibli-Style AI Art Trend: Origin, Popularity, and Ethical Implications
[xxi] Sohu, ‘The Impact of AI on Art: Ghibli-Style Images and Ethical Concerns_the_works_raises’.
[xxii] Johnson, ‘Exploring the Ethical Implications of AI-Powered Art’.
