Valve Unveils AI-Generated Content on Steam Greenlight

Valve, the owner of Steam, has clarified its stance on AI-generated content in games. While there is no explicit ban on AI-generated content, Valve emphasizes that game developers using AI technologies must have appropriate commercial licenses and must not infringe on existing copyrights. The focus is on ensuring that developers possess the rights to the content included in their games. Valve has recognized the complexities introduced by AI in game development, especially regarding asset creation.

The main issue revolves around the legal rights associated with AI-generated assets, including images, text, and music. Valve’s policy necessitates developers to have appropriate rights for the content in their games. This is a precautionary measure to avoid potential legal disputes. With AI scraping the internet for assets, it’s crucial to ascertain that game developers hold rights to the artwork and assets used.

Valve’s guidelines state that developers should refrain from submitting games with content they do not own the rights to. This is particularly important since the US Copyright Office stated that AI-generated art cannot currently be copyrighted. Valve’s intent is not to discourage AI’s application in game development. Instead, they aim to integrate AI use into their existing review policies, reflecting current copyright law and policies.

With AI tools capable of generating character models and in-game assets, which might be sourced from existing franchises, the legal territory becomes murky. Therefore, Valve insists that game developers using these AI technologies must have appropriate commercial licenses and must not infringe on existing copyrights.

Valve’s stance on AI-generated content is a reflection of current copyright law and policies. Their guidelines are designed to ensure that game developers using AI technologies have the appropriate commercial licenses and do not infringe on existing copyrights. By doing so, Valve aims to avoid potential legal disputes while still allowing the integration of AI use into their existing review policies.