I have not seen any rule on Adobe where it says it was forbidden to use other people's work as a prompt.
Do not get me wrong, I think what is happening to you is very clearly moraly wrong (but this was absolutely to be expected with AI), but it's not explicitly against Adobe's rules.

This is forbidden by Adobe in several ways.
There is the warning that we all get that you can't use other artists' work as a reference in your prompt when you upload an image.
Furthermore the Adobe Stock Generative AI guidelines state "Don�t: Use an image, vector or video you don�t have the rights to as a parameter for your generative AI prompts." (https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/generative-ai-content.html)
Also in the Adobe Stock contributor Guidelines (https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/submission-guidelines.html) under "Prohibited Activities", there is listed "Copying other artists� files or keywords".
Also in Adobe Stock's license agreement (https://wwwimages2.adobe.com/content/dam/cc/en/legal/servicetou/Stock-Additional-Terms-en_US-20200615.pdf) they prohibit the use of watermarked comp images for any purpose other than "for previewing how the Stock Asset may look or sound in a production or Project."
And even if someone licenses the images from Adobe they are still not permitted to use it for any AI purpose: "You must not:.. use the Stock Assets.. for any.. machine learning or artificial intelligence purposes."

Imo, I think you are wrong to suggest that this is "not explicitly against Adobe's rules".

Hahaha! That phrase "exciting news"! How many times have we seen that now?! It always means the opposite.

They rejected an animation of a crying emoji (100% my own design), but I thought the email was quite funny because under the rejection message there was the picture of the crying emoji which looked like it was a reaction to the rejection.

Matt:  I've had illustrations rejected by Adobe because:

- Non compliant use of another artist�s name.
- Undeclared Generative AI Content

This is not true - I don't use and have never used AI.

Do I risk getting banned from Adobe from incorrect AI rejections?

This happens to me occasionally when I submit fractals and 3D renders and the reviewers think they are AI. Last time it happened I just re-uploaded the image and it was accepted. On other occasions I have written to Support with the file numbers and the files have been accepted. This is not the sort of thing that people get banned for.

I didn�t experience the days before digital but I was an iStock video exclusive from 2008 until 2014. I got into doing Stock when I was a freelance motion graphics and vfx artist. I was struggling to juggle deadlines with parenting toddlers and Stock was a life saver for me. The final straw was when I was working on graphics for a TV show that was live on air at 8pm and it was 6pm and the producers were still sending through changes they needed, and my 2-year-old had chicken pox. He was sitting on the floor of my home office crying miserably and I couldn�t leave what I was doing to comfort him. After that I decided I had to do something less deadline-focused. I feel so lucky to have found Stock in its heyday as it enabled me to fit my work around being a mum/mom, and still earn the same amount as before. (Obviously that is no longer the case, but it was good while it lasted.)

I have said this (on Discord) from the moment when I found out that AI-only contributors were paid the Firefly bonus. It makes a mockery of Adobe Stock claiming to be ethical. They pass it off by saying that any AI content submitted and approved to their site has been designated by the contributor as non-infringing. But most of that AI content has Getty Images and Shutterstock and other stock agencies' watermarked images in its dataset.

@InJuisticeForAll On the Discord server Mat Hayward has said they used Ai images to train Firefly.

4.3 times more downloads than March 2023 and 3.7 times more revenue

In my Home feed I don't get any notifications of new posts on the AI Generated Stock Photography board. Is there a setting I need to change? Maybe making this post will help!

There is a delay of several days from when the sales are made and when P5 reports them, so they are probably mid-week sales not Sunday sales.

My payment worked out at about 1 cent per video.

A year ago my P5 dataset payment was 3 times greater. Shutterstock dataset payments have also been getting smaller and smaller. How can this be when Shutterstock's latest quarterly report says that the 2023 full year revenue from their Data, Distribution, and Services product offering increased 256% as compared to 2022?

This happens sometimes on Adobe. If my other assets of the same file type are getting reviewed in a day but I have some stuck for a month then I re-upload them and they get reviewed in a day and I delete the stuck ones.

https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/nearly-1-000-fake-accounts-selling-stolen-photos-discovered/

thank you 

Being "active" is an important factor in visibility on most sites.