Usually I don't write much on the forum but now I have to write a little about our work and I mean... "Us 3d artists".
 
Recently more and more of the websites ask me to attach a property release for each of my work to show them the animation construction. Including timelines, toolboxes, a brief description of the creation process, and the original source of all CGI models I used.

Istock asked me in writing, in the property release to specify that my video it is not AI generated.

All being said I'm even getting threats from Shutterstock "This asset has been rejected. AI Generated Content: AI generated content is prohibited. Repeated submission of such content will result in account suspension and/or termination."

It is already more and more difficult for me to keep proving, apologizing and starting from the beginning...all the time. I wonder if there are other people in my situation?!

This sometimes happens to me but it's infrequent enough that I can cope with it. The funniest one was when Pond5 rejected a nebula animation for being AI and iStock simultaneously rejected it for being made from NASA elements. It was actually made with fractals.

I also wanted to say that it's not exactly a new thing. I was an iStock video exclusive way back in 2008-2014 and we had to submit these kinds of screenshots and explanation for every single digitally created video, to show we weren't using presets. After I had been dutifully doing it for a few years I was messaged by iStock's @VCR/Jim (anyone remember him?) and I was informed that they trusted me enough to alleviate me of this tedious task. Nowadays I occasionally get asked for screenshots on iStock.

btw syn, I'm surprised that P5 rejected one of your vids with the reason being that it included NASA elements such as for example earth textures or photos of nebula, as I believe it's all open source/copywrite free.

P5 rejected the nebula animation because they thought it was AI. It was iStock who thought it was NASA. They didn't reject it outright but returned it for revision, saying it appeared to be derived from maps, globes or similar source, and asking for information about the sources such as exact NASA URL's.