\n<\/p>\n
In recent months, some of the major players in science fiction and popular culture have been taking firmer stances against generative AI.<\/p>\n
Separate decisions by San Diego Comic-Con and the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Association (SFWA) illustrate the depth of AI opposition within some creative communities \u2014 though they\u2019re certainly not the only ones, with music distribution platform Bandcamp also recently banning generative AI<\/a>.<\/p>\n Back in December, when SFWA announced that it was updating its rules for the Nebula Awards. Works written entirely by large language models would not be eligible, while authors who used LLMs \u201cat any point during the writing process\u201d had to disclose that use, allowing award voters to make their own decisions about whether that usage would affect their support.<\/p>\n As Jason Sanford reported in his Genre Grapevine newsletter<\/a>, this change drew immediate backlash for seemingly opening the door to work partly created by LLMs. SFWA\u2019s Board of Directors issued an apology a few days later<\/a>, writing, \u201cOur approach and wording was wrong and we apologize for the distress and distrust we caused.\u201d<\/p>\n The rules were revised yet again, now stating that works that are \u201cwritten, either wholly or partially, by generative large language model (LLM) tools are not eligible\u201d for Nebula Awards and that work will be disqualified if LLMs were used at any point in its creation.<\/p>\n In a follow-up post<\/a>, Sanford said he was pleased to see SFWA listen to its members, and he said he refuses to use gen AI in his own fiction writing \u2014 \u201cnot only because of this theft but also because the tools are not actually creative and defeat the entire point of storytelling.\u201d Still, he wrote that important questions need to be answered about how broadly LLM usage will be defined, especially as \u201cthese generative AI products are being forced down everyone\u2019s throats by major corporations.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIf you use any online search engines or computer products these days, it\u2019s likely you\u2019re using something powered by or connected with an LLM,\u201d Sanford said. \u201cBecause of that, we must be careful that writers who use word processing and research tools with LLM components aren\u2019t unfairly disqualified from awards like the Nebulas or attacked by readers and other writers. \u201c<\/p>\n Techcrunch event<\/p>\n \n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSan Francisco<\/span> The massive annual San Diego Comic-Con faced a similar controversy this month after artists noticed rules allowing AI-generated art to be displayed \u2014 but not sold \u2014 at the convention\u2019s art show. After artists complained, the rules were quietly changed to say<\/a>, \u201cMaterial created by Artificial Intelligence (AI) either partially or wholly, is not allowed in the art show.\u201d<\/p>\n While Comic-Con\u2019s apology was less public than SFWA, some artists shared emailed responses from art show head Glen Wooten, who apparently said the previous rules had been in place for \u201ca few years\u201d and that they\u2019d been effective as a deterrent, since no one had entered AI-generated art in the show.<\/p>\n \u201cBut the issue is becoming more of a problem, so more strident language is necessary: NO! Plain and simple,\u201d Wooten reportedly said.<\/p>\n It\u2019s probably safe to that assume other organizations will be announcing similarly hard-line stances this year \u2014 and that these communities will continue debating the larger issues. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t|<\/span>
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tOctober 13-15, 2026<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n