Ban all A.I. generative submissions before it's too late

Question

A.I. generated art has no copyright because it is all inheritly stolen. How on Earth is Adobe buying and selling licneses to generative images?

They made a choice to allow them first and ask questions later. But we now know more about how these generators pulled art into their databases, which was largely under a false pretense: https://petapixel.com/2022/12/21/midjourny-founder-admits-to-using-a-hundred-million-images-without-...

and has led to a billion dollar lawsuit already: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ai-stable-diffusion-stability-ai-lawsuit-artists-sue-image-generators/

We also now know have the first major ruling on copyright viabilty, which is zero: https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattnovak/2023/02/22/ai-created-images-in-new-comic-book-arent-protecte...

This will be my final month as a subscriber if Adobe continues to not only hide from this issue, but actively embrace it for a profit.

j_middles · Answer

I'm confused about Adobe's generative A.I. content licensing.

Thier guidelines state: "Never submit content that infringes the rights of third parties, including mimicking or replicating the content or style."

An A.I. generator, by definition "mimics and replicates third party styles and content," do you see my confusion?

Here's just one example: https://stock.adobe.com/contributor/211195018/opperman?load_type=author&prev_url=detail

[moderator merged this with a similar thread by the same author]

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded