The illustrated new edition of A Song of Ice and Fire: A Time for Crows is said to have used AI art. Now the publisher’s representative has commented on the allegations.
In October 2025, we reported that the well-known fantasy author George R.R. Martin taking legal action against OpenAI. He accuses the company of using his works without authorization to train its ChatGPT language model. The author is thus clearly opposed to the unauthorized use of third-party copyrighted works by AI.
Now, the publisher of one of his books is accused of violating copyright law itself through the use of AI. At first glance, this seems to contradict what Martin stands for. The publisher’s representative has now published an official statement in an attempt to shed light on the matter.
The community finds numerous inconsistencies
This is what happened: A Song of Ice and Fire: Time of Crows has been given an illustrated new edition in the US version, in which the book has been expanded with numerous images. However, some fans have noticed numerous inconsistencies that collected by user tell32 on Reddit.
- Excessive use of blue—even for characters where it makes little to no sense (Cersei, Jaime, Margaery, Tommen, Euron).
- Lack of banners and coats of arms throughout the work. Lions, which one would expect to see in large numbers, are nowhere to be found.
- A Christian cross appears in the image in which Sam strikes Daeron.
- The image of Lady Stoneheart looks suspiciously like fan art—only with a crown that is significantly less faithful to the books (Robb’s crown, which is quite simple). [See X post below]
- Victarion bizarrely carries two swords in his image (in the book, he has an axe and a shield).
- So many characters have their mouths wide open – this looks particularly strange in the images showing Euron at the kingsmoot and Cersei being arrested by the septas.
- Overall, a very generic look throughout the entire work. The image of Euron and that of Cersei sitting at the foot of the Iron Throne (which is strongly reminiscent of the series version) stand out in particular.
so just to let y’all know the new affc illustrated edition is like almost definitely ai lol and id argue has taken pretty hard ‘inspiration’ from existing fanart
(1st piece by zippo514) pic.twitter.com/GuLdFima0U— 2åse (@novembernatten) November 5, 2025
Reddit user chewiehedwig points out: If a human had created the images, they would have read the passages they were illustrating. That is inexcusable, regardless of what ultimately comes of [the allegations].
More images from the book are shown by Reddit user mildlyinfuriating:
The illustrated edition of A Feast For Crows obviously using AI
by
u/whimsicalWillow1121 in
mildlyinfuriating
A questionable statement
Publishing representative Raya Golden has spoken out on George R. R. Martin’s official website and published a statement:
My name is Raya Golden, and I handle art direction and licensing development, working closely with George R. R. Martin as his schedule permits. I am solely responsible for approving any licensed art related to our A Song of Ice and Fire books.
Recently, allegations have been circulating that the Penguin Random House Illustrated Edition of A Time for Crows was developed using AI-generated art.
To the best of our knowledge and according to the artist who was commissioned to do the work, no such program was used. Although he is a multimedia artist and uses digital programs, he has made it unequivocally clear that no AI was used, and we believe him. So…
The official statement from our office is, of course, that we do not, have never, and will never knowingly work with AI-generated artists in any form or in any way.
The statement makes it clear that George R. R. Martin is not responsible for the selected illustrations and that the responsibility lay entirely with Golden.
Furthermore, the announcement is questionable because, although the elephant in the room was addressed, the individual allegations were not. For example, no explanation was given as to why a Christian symbol was used in a book in which Christianity does not even exist, or why there is an image that is most likely based on fan art.
In addition, comments were disabled under the post. Overall, the statement seems more evasive than explanatory. However, it is important to note that the publisher cannot be proven to have lied. This is still only speculation. The only thing that is certain is that the statement did not help to calm the waters.
On Reddit, opinions on the statement are divided. While the vast majority consider the post to be a lie, some believe that only the artist is lying and that Golden actually acted in good faith. However, hardly anyone on Reddit defends the claim that the art is not AI.
At the same time, it is rightly pointed out that despite all the evidence and clues, we can only speculate. And it is unlikely that the publisher’s representative will comment on the allegations again.
