I wrote this reply below in response to CreamMeAgain:
https://umd.net/forums/i/ai-attitudes-survey-2025?start=60#postid_1083773
I decided to move this to a different thread because it does not have much to do with the poll. Here is my reply:


AI can be like piracy. It is not just the content that gets generated, but there are AI-models

Models need to be aware that their photos may be used to train an AI-model (or often called lora models). These AI-models are distributed and are often available on the generator websites. These AI-models are able to consistently reproduce the likeness of a person. If one person buys a photoset to get photos and train an AI-model on it, then others do not need to purchase the photoset if the AI-model is distributed. So this is exactly like piracy. Also, the AI-model allows you to generate nude, sexualized, or wammed images of their likeness.

Models now need to search for AI-models similar to how they search for piracy. I suggest using search engines and searching for their name plus "lora" or "ai model", or try searching on the popular AI websites.

I found 3 models that have made WAM content on sites hosting their AI-model:

Chloe Toy
Ashley Lane
Kendra James

Attached are images as proof with their faces blurred out to avoid breaking rules. I am assuming these AI-models were created without the Model's consent, and that they do not like their image being used to create nonconsensual content even if it is fan art.

I'm not even sure what Models can do to take them down. This is not like something which a DMCA takedown request can be used.

I knew about this 2 years ago, but I didn't want to say anything because I didn't want to spread the knowledge. Also, since then, it has become so easy with the tools because they require fewer images and even a single image. I hesitate to post this because I am making a lot of people aware that these AI-models exist, and the can use it to create non-consensual AI wam content or nude sexual content. People are figuring this out anyways.

It is also possible to reproduce content that simulates a producer's work similar to how they can reproduce an artists painting style. This is also similar to piracy. I will admit to training an AI-model, generating content, and sharing images on this forum a long while back. I never distributed the AI-model though. I stopped last year though. I will admit have generated nude wam content of celebrities for my own personal use, but I stopped doing that as well.

Here are some discussion points and questions:

Should discussions about how to create nonconsensual content be allowed?

With the rules right now, someone can post the links to these AI-models and a guide to how to create AI wam content of these Models or celebrities.

This would be difficult to moderate because I could discuss a generic workflow that can be adapted to make non-consensual content.

I think discussions should be disallowed when they specify names Models or celebrates. It should be against the rule to request nonconsensual content too.

Should links to nonconsensual content be allowed?

With the rules right now, someone can upload nonconsensual content to youtube or other video platforms, and I can post links to them. Someone could even setup a store website or patreon to sell it and link to the nonconsensual ai wam scenes here as long as they don't upload content.

This would be difficult to moderate too because it is verify difficult to be aware of every celebrity or person. This seems similar to the other rules about linking because it is as difficult as guessing the age or target audience of videos. I would guess it would rely on reports to identify content that breaks the rule.

I think the links should be disallowed. I don't want to see this site get a reputation for being a community that shares nonconsensual content. Links to piracy are not allowed. Links to minors content is not allowed. Links to nonconsensual wam content should not be allowed.

Is there anything we can do to help these Models?

I have no idea how to contact these Models. Do they know about this? We have a piracy report tool, so I am wondering if something similar is needed for future cases involving members here. Or maybe we can use the piracy report tool.

It is crazy how anything can be created by anyone that victimizes anyone, and it is becoming incredible easy to do so.

If Disney, Universal, Warner Bros, etc..can't do anything to stop AI platforms, certainly an individual's lawsuit is going nowhere.

This is an important post.

This is completely and utterly wrong on a moral level and whoever did these would be committing a sexual offence if they lived where I live.

These are porn models who have done some WAM, rather than models who only do WAM. I would assume whoever made these is not a wammer as the example images are not wam images. I'm not saying this makes it any better, but this most likely isn't one of us, at least.

You are correct regarding teaching "non-consensual methods", I want to make it very clear to people who don't know the technical stuff: there is absolutely no way of teaching someone how to train a Lora legitimately for an AI model without it being self-evidently obvious that the same method could be used to make non-consensual images. A good analogy would be like how it's impossible to teach someone to use a rifle for hunting without it being obvious that they could use that rifle in the same way for murder. I'm sure a few familiar names will argue that that means we should ban any discussion of AI techniques, but I thought that most of you lived in the land of the free, and I would argue that the individual is solely responsible for their actions and how they use their knowledge.

I strongly agree that links to non-consensual material should not be allowed. Again, depending on the exact content, where I live it it could be considered a sex crime. On a moral level as fetishists, allowing it to to be linked to from this site would be similar to allowing material featuring kids to be linked to from this site. I know MM is considering these things, and I think this should be the next policy he changes.

I think posting non-consensual R-rated or X-rated images should be result in being banned, whether AI or non-AI. There's absolutely no excuse for it.

However, proving it is non-consensual another matter

MM makes it very clear in the TOS that users are responsible for their actions and the consequences of their actions. It would be good if MM made clear a protocol for reporting and 'calling out' people that was fair to everyone involved. It would be terrible for someone to get falsely accused of this over a petty feud and to get caught up in a witch-hunt, but it would be just as bad if offenders just got their photos deleted but nothing else happened.

I'm not sure fetish models will have a lot to worry about when AI gets to a stage when people into WAM will be able to prompt; "Ok, a girl who looks like Madison Beer and one who likes like Olivia Rodrigo have a pie fight, then fall into a mud pit."

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say about whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, but the scene you've described above is already possible to make with AI. It would involve making and editing together a series of 5 second shots, using photos of Madison Beer and Olivia Rodrigo (with their consent, to be moral and legal about it) to train Loras. You'd probably also need to train a Lora on existing WAM videos or clips from the Great Race for the pie fight segment as well (again, with consent). It would take some effort, but you could do it.

What we're discussing is people doing exactly the above without consent, and fetish models will have plenty to worry about.