Contests that use generative AI are increasing, but adopting a work as an official poster raises major concerns about copyright and similarity to existing works.
In Naruto City, Tokushima Prefecture, the official poster for the 2026 Naruto City Awa Odori was chosen through an open call that required generative AI.
There were 251 entries from across Japan, and the grand-prize work was adopted as the official poster.
What stands out is that the process went beyond visual judging and included checks of prompts (instruction text) to address copyright risk.
This article summarizes how a local festival, generative AI, and rights-clearance practices came together.
The key point is not only making something interesting with AI, but bringing it to a state that can be used officially.
What was carried out
The organizer is the Naruto Awa Odori Executive Committee, formed by Naruto City, the Naruto Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Uzushio Tourism Association, and others.
Posters that had usually been commissioned from local businesses or illustrators were switched to a public call this time.
The entry condition was that the work must be created using generative AI. Any tool was allowed, and human touch-ups and editing were also permitted.
The call ran from May 11 to May 31, 2026. Each person could submit up to five works, and groups and corporations could also enter.
One grand prize and two excellence awards were selected, and the grand-prize work became the official poster for fiscal 2026.
The grand prize included a 30,000-yen gift card and local specialties; excellence awards included a 10,000-yen gift card and local specialties.
What the winning work looks like
The grand prize went to a work by the pen name “Nagihoppe,” a Naruto City resident.
According to the city, the decisive factors were a composition that clearly shows Naruto’s whirlpools, the Onaruto Bridge, and dancers, together with a powerful design that makes good use of generative AI.
Excellence awards went to “Takuwan” from Awa City and “Takashi” from Anan City.
The official poster is displayed at tourism facilities inside and outside the city and is used to promote the summer Awa Odori (held August 9–11).
Related goods such as fans and tenugui towels are also being produced, so the poster is part of the festival’s broader visual rollout.
Why prompt review matters
Copyright and similarity to existing works are unavoidable issues in generative AI image contests.
Under Japanese copyright law, the question is not only whether a work looks similar, but also whether it was created in reliance on an existing work.
This initiative drew attention for checking submitted prompts rather than judging images by appearance alone.
Reviewing prompts makes it easier to check points such as:
- Whether specific existing works or character names were requested
- Whether the instructions suggest an intent to imitate
- How the entrant instructed the AI and built the expression
Image-search checks for similarity to existing works are also described as a practical way to reduce rights risk.
The guidelines also banned infringement of others’ rights and stated that rights issues arising from AI generation are the entrant’s responsibility.
In other words, the premise is not “AI means anything goes,” but “even with AI, a rights-check process is required.”
There are also cases such as Matsue City’s mascot project being canceled over copyright risk, so tension around generative AI use by local governments is rising nationwide.
Against that backdrop, Naruto City’s choice to “use AI with verification” rather than “not use it” is distinctive.
What the judging looked at
The executive committee reportedly reviewed theme, visibility, originality, and other factors comprehensively.
Coverage also says that how well entrants instructed and used AI was evaluated alongside Naruto-like qualities.
This means judging not only the beauty of the finished image, but also prompt design skill and human editing skill.
It is an example showing that, in generative AI creative work, the difference often comes from how you instruct and finish, more than from tool operation itself.
Takeaways for governments and businesses
The case suggests using generative AI with conditions—neither banning it nor allowing it without limits.
- Explicitly require generative AI use as a condition
- Collect prompts and production process to make reliance easier to check
- Combine visual rights checks such as similar-image search
- Clarify responsibility for rights issues in the guidelines
- Allow human editing to secure final quality
The same issues quickly appear in municipal publicity and corporate campaigns.
Especially for official posters that are widely distributed and displayed, explainability of rights clearance matters as much as visual impact.
Keeping records of who made the work, with what instructions, and how much human editing was added also helps if problems arise later.
If you roll out from website and reservation systems to social posts, it is safer to design design rights and publishing workflows together from the start.
Summary
Naruto City’s generative AI poster contest balances promotion of a traditional festival with experimentation in new technology.
A work chosen from 251 entries became the official poster, making AI imagery a front-facing part of local PR.
At the same time, the stance of facing copyright risk through prompt review and similar checks is useful for future AI use by governments and companies.
At Makoto Tejima, we value designing generative AI content and web/system projects with rights checks, operating rules, and existing-system integration—not only creative expression.
Please feel free to consult us about digitalizing event publicity, internal generative AI rules, or linking official sites with reservation and announcement systems.
