AI generated image has watermarks from other stock sites

[SarahStyle]

I downloaded an image from Adobe Stock without downloading the preview first.  After importing it into Photoshop I noticed that there appear to be faint artifacts of other watermarks on the image.  I knew this was an AI-generated image before downloading it but I didn't expect to find these additional watermarks on the image.  This makes it unusable.

Wanted to report this image for further review.   I'm not concerned about getting refunded but wanted to keep others from making the same mistake.

https://stock.adobe.com/images/icing-frosting-texture-seamless-background-close-up-created-with-gene...

Also, this is kind of a red flag... I was under the assumption that the images generated with AI were using a dataset of other Adobe stock images.  These watermarks make it seem that Adobe stock is stripping images from Google or elsewhere without consent (hints the watermarks).  

[daniellei4510]

The asset does indeed have some issues. Perhaps @Contributor1 can assist you with a refund.

That said, there is no guarantee this asset was created using Adobe's Firefly, as AI images from other AI softwares can be submitted here. This used to happen more often with older AI softwares than with the latest iterations, so perhaps this was created some time back. In any even, the contributor clearly didn't spend enough time reviewing this image for inconsistenies.

[Contributor1]

Hello @SarahStyle, This image was uploaded by the contributor before Adobe Firefly was public so it was not created in Firefly. I see the issue you're referencing and I've sent these details to be reviewed internally. Thank you for the report and sorry for the problem with the image.

[SarahStyle]

Thank you for the clarification!  Glad to hear this isn't a Firefly issue either.

[Abambo]

@SarahStyle,

Just to say, contributors are free to use any image generator they want. They do not need to use Firefly, as they do not need to use Photoshop or Illustrator. 

But assets with watermarks and other issues clearly passed the quality contral that gets done by Adobe before they enter the database, but they should have gotten a refusal.