Nearly 4,000 artists, academics, and industry professionals signed an open letter urging Christie’s to cancel its “Augmented Intelligence” auction. Running from Feb. 20 to March 5, it is the first major auction focused entirely on artificial intelligence-generated art. Protesters argue that many works were created using AI models trained on copyrighted material without consent.
The auction features work from well-known AI artists, including Sasha Stiles, Holly Herndon & Mat Dryhurst, Refik Anadol, and Alexander Reben. The auction includes a mix of digital and physical pieces, such as NFTs, sculptures, paintings, and prints.
Christie’s expects the sale to bring in between $15,000 and $600,000 overall, with individual artworks estimated to sell for anywhere from $15,000 to $250,000.
Critics argue that these AI models were trained on copyrighted material without permission. The open letter accuses Christie’s of supporting the exploitation of human artists, stating, “These models, and the companies behind them, exploit human artists, using their work without permission or payment.” The protests reflect ongoing tensions over AI’s impact on artistic ownership and creativity.
Christie’s has defended the auction, maintaining that AI does not replace human creativity but rather enhances it.
“AI is not a replacement for human creativity,” Nicole Sales Giles, Christie’s director of digital art, said.
She believes the artists in the auction are using AI to support their creative process, not to replace human effort.
AI-generated art has sparked legal and ethical debates for years. In 2018, Christie’s sold an AI-generated portrait for $400,000, and in 2024, an AI robot, Ai-Da, created a painting that sold for over $1 million at Sotheby’s. Lawsuits against companies like Midjourney and Stability AI continue to raise copyright concerns.
Protesters believe that Christie’s auction legitimizes unethical practices. Karla Ortiz, an artist involved in a lawsuit against AI companies, criticized the auction, stating, “For them to be holding this show basically normalizes what I consider theft.”
Many argue that the auction house is prioritizing profits over the rights of human artists whose works may have been used to train AI models without compensation.
Some artists, however, see AI as an opportunity rather than a threat. Alexander Reben, one of the artists featured in the auction, believes AI can push creative boundaries.
“AI models trained on public data are done so under the idea of fair use,” he said.
His artwork in the auction includes a robot that paints live during the bidding process and evolves as people place higher bids.
The debate over AI art is far from over. As AI technology advances, the legal and ethical questions around its role in the art world will only grow. While Christie’s sees AI as the future of art, many artists worry it threatens their work and livelihoods.
The “Augmented Intelligence” auction isn’t just a sale—it’s a major moment in the ongoing debate over AI’s place in creative expression.
