Proof of their incompetence in handling situations. They are barely capable of giving a marketing speech, �everything is fine, we are managing!�
And the contempt for honest contributors from the start is growing, as they depend less and less on them. The contributor community is divided, great for them, they can rule.

I still don't know how this will play out.  If people are not getting any compensation for their work - why would anyone post anything to the internet other than for fun.  If people stop posting anything high value such as artwork, photographs, video, written content what will AI work from - it's own outputs?  Do tech bros think people are going to spend their own dime and time for them to profit from? 

To be fair to Shutterstock - they rejected some of my images under "AI" but I raised a support call and it was sorted pretty quickly.

I've let Blackbox know, I'm a contributor there.

Hi

Uploaded some illustrations and some were rejected by SS

"AI Generated Content: AI generated content is prohibited. Repeated submission of such content will result in account suspension and/or termination."

Thing is they are not AI, I don't use AI.  I've emailed SS to dispute this but it's a bit worrying if they can ban you because of their mistake.

Anyone else had this experience?

Thanks
Cat

Doesn't matter how much time it saves someone *if* it turns out AI can't be copyrighted you're not stealing. 

Thanks Derby I'm not in US so I don't know how copyright laws are changed and made law (not asking you to explain) more research on my part.

Thanks again

Thanks Her Ugliness

Yes I've misunderstood.

https://petapixel.com/2024/02/22/disturbing-ai-images-of-children-found-for-sale-on-shutterstock/

Total can of worms opening up.

"Well great big thank you, after they used everything for free."

Yes I know - although this has been raised in a US senate hearing and the fact that artists have not been asked permission to use their work or compensated.   (BTW I'm from England so not familiar with US political structures).   

In England copyright is classed as "fair use"  and not for profit but AI is very much for profit.  And if it's damaging artists income how is that "fair use".

Disclaimer I'm not a lawyer but just curios.

Thanks
Cat

There's a chap on youtube (Adam Duff) who's walking through some of the AI hearings.  I'm not affiliated with this chap just thought they were interesting.

Yes heard it does degrade the original image slightly although the Nightshade designers are working on it.

Don't know much I only heard that it can break the datasets resulting in silly images if a few Nightshaded images are in the dataset.  Could at least be disruptive to AI. 

I guess we'll see.

Thanks again

Thanks Wilm - true hard to say if it will affect portfolio performance.

Just wondering if anyone has opted out of AI - button looks available but wondering what the consequences would be.

Thanks