remember when... the artists, the internet and the age of artificial intelligence
An open conversation about creativity, ownership, technology, billionaires and what we're teaching the next generation.
There was a time when artists worried about computers.
Back in the 1990s, programs like CorelDRAW were changing the way people created images and designs. Then came the explosion of the internet, digital photography, Photoshop, online galleries and social media.
Suddenly, artists could share their work with the entire world.
It was exciting. We could reach people we would never otherwise meet. We could build websites, publish photographs, sell paintings and create our own little corners of the internet.
But there was another side to that freedom.
Images could be copied, downloaded, altered and reproduced. Independent artists began finding their original designs on merchandise they had never authorized. Companies such as Temu and Shein have faced repeated accusations of copying independent designers' work.
For many creators, fighting back costs more than they can afford.
A Canadian Métis artist, Juliet Mackie, discovered her beaded earring designs being sold on Temu. Other Canadian artists have reported similar experiences. These aren't simply anonymous images. They represent someone's time, skill, cultural knowledge and livelihood.
And then came artificial intelligence.
when the internet became a training ground
Today, enormous collections of photographs, illustrations, paintings, books, music and writing have been gathered through web scraping and other data collection methods to develop AI systems.
Many artists and writers say their copyrighted work was used without their knowledge, permission or compensation.
The distinction matters.
Copying an individual painting and selling it is one problem. Collecting millions of images to train a machine is another. Generating new images that imitate an artist's distinctive style introduces yet another set of questions.
Who owns the original?
Who owns the output?
Who gets paid?
Who gets credit?
And who decides whether permission was ever given?
These questions are not settled.
In Canada, the federal government has already consulted on copyright and generative AI. Its 2025 report documented concerns from creators about consent, attribution, compensation, transparency and competition.
In March 2026, Canada's first National Summit on Artificial Intelligence and Culture brought these issues together again. Participants called for stronger protections, transparency about training material, fair licensing and compensation, and attention to the growing imbalance of power between technology companies and creators.
This isn't just a handful of artists complaining on social media. It is now a national cultural and economic policy issue.
and then there's Meta
In October 2026, Meta's revised commercial terms caused another controversy.
The original wording appeared to give Meta broad permission to use content from websites associated with business accounts, including language explicitly referring to AI training.
Following criticism, Meta removed the explicit training language and said the changes did not alter how its web crawlers operate. It subsequently delayed enforcement of its revised business terms to November 20 while it addressed concerns.
Publishers and legal experts remain concerned about what the terms could mean for online content.
Think about that for a moment.
Artists, photographers, journalists, writers and small businesses spent years building websites and audiences. Now they have to consider whether the material they publish may become part of someone else's commercial technology.
And Meta isn't the only company involved in this much larger debate.
the billionaire economy
We are living through an extraordinary concentration of technological and financial power.
A relatively small number of enormous corporations control significant parts of the infrastructure through which we communicate, advertise, publish, distribute information and increasingly create.
Their owners and executives have access to financial resources, computing infrastructure, legal departments and influence that independent creators simply don't have.
AI can be an extraordinarily useful tool. It can assist with research, accessibility, education, translation, medical discoveries and creative experimentation.
But who benefits from the technology?
If a machine is developed using the accumulated creative output of millions of people, should those people have a say?
Should they be credited?
Should they be compensated?
Should they be able to refuse?
Should companies disclose what they used?
And what happens when the same technology begins competing with the people whose work helped make it possible?
This isn't an argument against technological progress. It's an argument for making sure progress doesn't come at the expense of everyone else.
what are we teaching our children?
This might be the most important part of the conversation.
Children and teenagers are growing up in a world where they can generate an image, a song, a photograph-like picture or an entire written story with a few instructions.
But do they understand where the information comes from?
Do they understand copyright, consent, plagiarism and intellectual property?
Do they know the difference between creating something themselves and asking a machine to create something using patterns learned from other people's work?
Do they understand that a convincing photograph might not document an actual event?
We need to teach more than how to use technology.
We need to teach:
- Creativity: Learn to draw, paint, write, photograph, compose and experiment. Develop your own ideas and your own voice.
- Respect: Don't take another person's work and pretend it belongs to you.
- Consent: Just because something is publicly available doesn't mean everyone has permission to use it for every purpose.
- Attribution: Give credit to the people who created the original work.
- Critical thinking: Question what you see, hear and read. Verify information before sharing it.
- Digital literacy: Understand that websites, apps and platforms collect information, and learn what happens to the material you upload.
- Ethics: Just because a technology makes something possible doesn't automatically make it fair or right.
- Human connection: Remember that behind a painting, photograph, song or story is often a person with a lifetime of experiences.
We also need to teach young people that AI can be a tool without becoming a substitute for learning, imagination, curiosity and independent thought.
remember the people behind the pictures
Think about Emily Carr, Vincent van Gogh and Claude Monet.
They lived in different times, faced different obstacles and had very different careers.
Emily Carr struggled for recognition. Vincent van Gogh died at 37, never seeing the enormous recognition his paintings would eventually receive. Monet eventually found financial security and lived long enough to enjoy the success of his work.
Their paintings became part of our shared cultural history.
Today, Emily Carr's paintings can be reproduced because her original works are in the public domain in Canada. Her legacy remains, even though copyright protection has expired.
But what about the independent artist working in a small apartment today? The photographer documenting a neighbourhood? The illustrator designing greeting cards? The musician recording songs at home? The Indigenous artist whose designs carry generations of cultural knowledge?
They deserve consideration too.
Not everyone wants fame or a fortune. Some people simply want to earn enough to live, pay their bills, support their families and continue making things.
That should not be too much to ask.
so what do we do?
We cannot put technology back in a box. We cannot retrieve every image that may already have been scraped from the internet. Taking down a website may limit future access, but it cannot guarantee that existing copies or training data disappear.
And individual copyright protection, while important, isn't enough when enforcement is expensive and the companies involved have enormous resources.
We need collective action.
We need transparent training datasets, meaningful consent, fair compensation, proper attribution, accessible dispute resolution and laws that recognize the realities of digital creation.
We need governments to listen to independent artists, not just the largest technology companies.
We need platforms to take responsibility for what happens to the work people publish through them.
And we need artists to support one another.
a message to the next generation
You are inheriting a world that is changing faster than any previous generation could have imagined.
You will have opportunities that your grandparents never dreamed of. You will also face challenges that we are only beginning to understand.
Don't assume that because something is digital it has no human value.
Don't assume that because a machine can imitate something it understands the experience behind it.
Don't assume that because a company is wealthy it is necessarily acting in the public interest.
And don't assume that one person cannot make a difference.
Ask questions. Learn the rules. Protect your work. Respect other people's work. Stand up for people whose voices are smaller than those of the corporations competing for your attention.
Because one day, you will look back at this period in history.
You might say:
REMEMBER when we thought the internet would give everyone a voice?
REMEMBER when artists could share their work with the world, before we understood what else was happening to it?
REMEMBER when we thought technological progress automatically meant a better future?
Let's make sure that when we look back, we can also say that we questioned it, challenged it and tried to make it fairer.
Creativity belongs to humanity. It shouldn't belong exclusively to the companies with the biggest computers and the deepest pockets.
Artists have always had to fight to be seen, heard and valued.
Perhaps it's time we stopped expecting them to fight alone.
#FightBackWithArt
#WarriorUpWithArt
