pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Announcing the Adobe Stock policy on generative AI content  (Read 7828 times)

1 Member and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: January 24, 2023, 13:50 »
0
What about hybrid images? Say a photo of a hand holding a phone, displaying an ai generated image. Or a generated room interior, with a real framed photo hanging on the wall. There could be infinite ways to combine camera photos with 3D renders, ai images, and even hand drawn illustrations.


« Reply #101 on: January 24, 2023, 17:35 »
+2
I just hope that the customers could be opt out AI products in the search result  8)

why would they if AI images meet their needs?
Because, at my thought, AI give the same taste on every things. And this is in-aesthetic. I think we all would need, in our life, something more authentic. 8)

« Reply #102 on: January 24, 2023, 21:13 »
+2
I just hope that the customers could be opt out AI products in the search result  8)

why would they if AI images meet their needs?
And if it doesn't meet their needs? It is already hard to find something specific on stock sites, now on top of that they have to search through thousands of AI images.

« Reply #103 on: January 25, 2023, 05:36 »
+5
I just hope that the customers could be opt out AI products in the search result  8)

why would they if AI images meet their needs?

Because so many people are copying the same prompts, you get endless very, very similar looking files. A lot more similar than in normal type of copying. This will get much worse, when Midjourney releases their app to the world.

So my buyers hat would like to be able to opt in or out of gen ai content.

I might also decide I want to only see gen ai files, for a specific project.

Give customers the choice and everyone is happy.

« Reply #104 on: January 25, 2023, 13:41 »
0
I just hope that the customers could be opt out AI products in the search result  8)

why would they if AI images meet their needs?
And if it doesn't meet their needs? It is already hard to find something specific on stock sites, now on top of that they have to search through thousands of AI images.

as opposed to the millions they already have to wade thru? 

why do you assume that AI won'ty supply 'someth ing specific'? and if they don't they are no threat to existing portfolios -- you can't claim AI is replacing traditional and that AI isnt filling a need! (actually, i guess you can claim that,  but it doesnt make much sense)


« Reply #105 on: January 25, 2023, 14:52 »
+2
I just hope that the customers could be opt out AI products in the search result  8)

why would they if AI images meet their needs?
And if it doesn't meet their needs? It is already hard to find something specific on stock sites, now on top of that they have to search through thousands of AI images.

as opposed to the millions they already have to wade thru? 

why do you assume that AI won'ty supply 'someth ing specific'? and if they don't they are no threat to existing portfolios -- you can't claim AI is replacing traditional and that AI isnt filling a need! (actually, i guess you can claim that,  but it doesnt make much sense)

If buyer thinks he will find something he needs in AI images, he could turn it on, if he doesn't, he could turn it off. Simple as that. I am not claiming AI is replacing traditional, I don't remember saying something like that.

ADH

« Reply #106 on: January 25, 2023, 15:07 »
+1
AI eventually will replace the photographer, the contributor and the agency. And the customer will get his/her images for free. It is matter of time.

« Reply #107 on: January 25, 2023, 16:19 »
0
AI eventually will replace the photographer, the contributor and the agency. And the customer will get his/her images for free. It is matter of time.

You can already download millions (billions?) of files for free legally from many different platforms.

Why do agencies still exist?

« Reply #108 on: January 25, 2023, 16:38 »
0
AI eventually will replace the photographer, the contributor and the agency. And the customer will get his/her images for free. It is matter of time.

You can already download millions (billions?) of files for free legally from many different platforms.

Why do agencies still exist?
True, but also sales are not even close to what they used to be. It is increasingly getting harder because all these reasons, free images, phone images, lower royalties, higher greed of agencies, now ai and who knows what else.

« Reply #109 on: January 25, 2023, 16:46 »
+1
Yes, there is a flood of images and many files actually have a very long shelf life. I am amazed that content from 2005 is still selling inspite of all the new uploads.

Ai will add another stress factor, but it is also an opportunity. IMO this is better than competing with a flood of free files or endless duplicates by the newbies sorting our ports by downloads somewhere and copying what works.

One of the reasons I avoided Dreamstime for a long time.

But Ai gives completely new opportunities for content, especially for concepts that might be difficult to shoot or simply save you time by visualizing your next shoot.

I think it is a great tool. For now.

« Reply #110 on: January 25, 2023, 19:36 »
0
AI eventually will replace the photographer, the contributor and the agency. And the customer will get his/her images for free. It is matter of time.

You can already download millions (billions?) of files for free legally from many different platforms.

Why do agencies still exist?

Companies with legal departments (like Disney - ABC) require employees and contributors (often graphic designers or journalists) to have releases / permission for everything including downloaded visual content.  The unusual high royalty at Shutterstock is probably Shutterstock charging for the inconvenience of having their licensing terms expanded and re-written. 

ADH

« Reply #111 on: January 25, 2023, 19:44 »
+2
David Holz, midjourney CEO, said less than an hour ago that he doesn't like midjourney-generated images being put up for sale through stock agencies. He said that he is seriously considering banning the sale of midjourney-generated images through stock agencies.

« Reply #112 on: January 25, 2023, 22:52 »
+1
David Holz, midjourney CEO, said less than an hour ago that he doesn't like midjourney-generated images being put up for sale through stock agencies. He said that he is seriously considering banning the sale of midjourney-generated images through stock agencies.

Where?

« Reply #113 on: January 26, 2023, 03:21 »
+1
David Holz, midjourney CEO, said less than an hour ago that he doesn't like midjourney-generated images being put up for sale through stock agencies. He said that he is seriously considering banning the sale of midjourney-generated images through stock agencies.

I can't find any source for this.
And it would be a complete nonsense, if real: why in the earth Midjourney would donate this market to dozens of competitor?
Also from legal point of view it seems very hard to say "You have commercial rights BUT not for this specific market". David Holz cannot "ban" that market, at the contrary the market can "ban" midjourney, that has been already done by SS and Getty.

By the way... it's a strange world and anything it's possible :) I would like to read the original source with the words of David Holz

« Reply #114 on: January 26, 2023, 04:21 »
+3
David Holz, midjourney CEO, said less than an hour ago that he doesn't like midjourney-generated images being put up for sale through stock agencies. He said that he is seriously considering banning the sale of midjourney-generated images through stock agencies.

I can't find any source for this.
And it would be a complete nonsense, if real: why in the earth Midjourney would donate this market to dozens of competitor?
Also from legal point of view it seems very hard to say "You have commercial rights BUT not for this specific market". David Holz cannot "ban" that market, at the contrary the market can "ban" midjourney, that has been already done by SS and Getty.

By the way... it's a strange world and anything it's possible :) I would like to read the original source with the words of David Holz

It depends on the company's Terms. Take for example the two biggest marketplaces for 3D models - Turbosquid and CGTrader.

Turbosquid doesn't allow images, generated from their models to be sold on stock markets, but CGTrader does.

« Reply #115 on: January 26, 2023, 04:56 »
0
It depends on the company's Terms. Take for example the two biggest marketplaces for 3D models - Turbosquid and CGTrader.

Turbosquid doesn't allow images, generated from their models to be sold on stock markets, but CGTrader does.

Really? I didn't know this is possible, I'm curious and I'll take a look how they can exactly restrict commercial rights. Thanks for the info

« Reply #116 on: January 26, 2023, 06:20 »
0
David Holz, midjourney CEO, said less than an hour ago that he doesn't like midjourney-generated images being put up for sale through stock agencies. He said that he is seriously considering banning the sale of midjourney-generated images through stock agencies.

I can't find any source for this.
And it would be a complete nonsense, if real: why in the earth Midjourney would donate this market to dozens of competitor?
Also from legal point of view it seems very hard to say "You have commercial rights BUT not for this specific market". David Holz cannot "ban" that market, at the contrary the market can "ban" midjourney, that has been already done by SS and Getty.

By the way... it's a strange world and anything it's possible :) I would like to read the original source with the words of David Holz

I have no information about the accuracy of the quote, but of course it would be no legal problem to restrict the usage in this way.

After all, stock agencies do it all the time. They sell commercial licences for the usage of images, but certain usages require an extended licence and some usages are forbidden even with an extended licence, notably reselling the image at other stock agencies.

« Reply #117 on: January 26, 2023, 06:43 »
0
I have no information about the accuracy of the quote, but of course it would be no legal problem to restrict the usage in this way.

After all, stock agencies do it all the time. They sell commercial licences for the usage of images, but certain usages require an extended licence and some usages are forbidden even with an extended licence, notably reselling the image at other stock agencies.

These are license restrictions for buyers.
Restriction of use for the copyright owner is completely different thing, much more difficult to manage. By the way, if someone do this, it means it's possible.

« Reply #118 on: January 26, 2023, 08:44 »
0
But Midjourney makes money selling access for commercial use, dont they?

So if artists can sell their designs to a commercial client, how will they stop the licensing via stock sites.

In the end they are just webshops.

If true this would mean midjourney cannot become a plug in for photoshop. They would be missing out on the biggest  design market.

« Reply #119 on: January 26, 2023, 09:12 »
0
Easy. Microstock licenses are similar (at least standard licenses). Buyers can use images commercially for client's work, websites, publications etc. but cannot resell them. Same is with Turbosquid which someone mentioned before. So Midjourney can write something similar in their license. Why would they do or not do that, I don't want to assume right now, considering I haven't found that info anywhere either.

ADH

« Reply #120 on: January 26, 2023, 11:49 »
0
David Holz, midjourney CEO, said less than an hour ago that he doesn't like midjourney-generated images being put up for sale through stock agencies. He said that he is seriously considering banning the sale of midjourney-generated images through stock agencies.

Where?
Yesterday in a town hall meeting he organizes every Wednesday in discord from 12 noon to 4 pm. Pacific time
Very interesting meetings with David Holz, they also talked about the new /blend mode, with results almost of photography quality
Everyone can now use the /blend mode, it is amazing
« Last Edit: January 26, 2023, 12:09 by ADH »

« Reply #121 on: January 26, 2023, 12:17 »
+1
Maybe he is upset because the stock agencies are coming after him to legally license the content.

He seems beyond naive when it comes to copyright.

If he scraped the entire internet and then charges people to use his ai he is a true hypocrit.

There is right way to do this.

But Adobe must be working 24/7 on their own ai and that will put him out of business in the end.

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/midjourney-founder-basically-admits-to-copyright-breaching-and-artists-are-angry?fbclid=IwAR2v3PRf1VzQXNQDxwgnjwj6vz_EYpEv9v-pUxHYVdT-U4fcmE4JsafEZMw
« Last Edit: January 26, 2023, 12:24 by cobalt »

« Reply #122 on: January 26, 2023, 12:29 »
+1
@Lina

I doubt mj can restrict usage terms like dont sell on stock agencies if mj just stole it all from the internet. They hold no usage right to the training files, so I doubt they can restrict the sale of the remix.

Looks like a feast for Getty Lawyers.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2023, 15:28 by cobalt »

« Reply #123 on: January 26, 2023, 12:45 »
0
Out of curiousity, if people are convertiing AI PNG images to illustrations , how are you doing this?

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #124 on: January 26, 2023, 12:52 »
+1
Maybe he is upset because the stock agencies are coming after him to legally license the content.

He seems beyond naive when it comes to copyright.

If he scraped the entire internet and then charges people to use his ai he is a true hypocrit.

There is right way to do this.

But Adobe must be working 24/7 on their own ai and that will put him out of business in the end.

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/midjourney-founder-basically-admits-to-copyright-breaching-and-artists-are-angry?fbclid=IwAR2v3PRf1VzQXNQDxwgnjwj6vz_EYpEv9v-pUxHYVdT-U4fcmE4JsafEZMw

You and the author make a huge list of biased and leading assumptions. Without permission doesn't mean illegally and infringing. Her piece is angry and outraged and leads the readers by repeating her personal opinion as known facts. The headline itself "Midjourney founder basically admits to copyright breaching and artists are angry"? Does he actually admit copyright breach?

Without consent 5 times, "The fact that the Midjourney team "weren't picky" suggests that this data set has not been carefully curated and could be biased. ", cleverly spotted if your images have been used, is in fact The website searches the LAION-5B training data set, a library of 5.85 billion images, that is used to feed Stable Diffusion and Googles Imagen. which isn't a secret at all.

"do you share the same rage as other artists and photographers on the subject?"  ::) No I don't.

May 2022 - LAION-5B is released. https://www.infoq.com/news/2022/05/laion-5b-image-text-dataset/#:~:text=The%20Large-scale%20Artificial%20Intelligence%20Open%20Network%20%28LAION%29%20released,making%20it%20the%20largest%20freely%20available%20image-text%20dataset.

You can download the LAION AI set, with text and image matched results, for free. No one owns the right to the training files, they are public property.

I think you are right about SS and AS creating their own versions that will be reviewed and monitored and will attempt to be unbiased as well as culling out any accidentally included, infringing images. A more responsible approach.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
42 Replies
11204 Views
Last post October 19, 2020, 04:36
by Shelma1
136 Replies
26597 Views
Last post December 03, 2021, 04:01
by rushay
7 Replies
2246 Views
Last post February 05, 2022, 17:54
by DnEEop
25 Replies
5304 Views
Last post March 16, 2022, 06:44
by Findura
2 Replies
374 Views
Last post January 11, 2023, 17:59
by MatHayward

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle