Skip to main content
A
Arenlion
Participant
September 17, 2023
Answered

So... AI copyright free, yes or no?

  • September 17, 2023
  • 2 replies
  • 8477 views

As of September 2023, after many updates, where do we stand with the copyright?

 

Is the entire AI section still in beta? I can see the labels within the neural filters, but where does the generative fill AI stand?

Is there, currently, a difference in copyright between generative expand or minor generative fill fixes, and full generated AI images?

 

Should it still be copyright locked, is there a timeline for its release?

 

Thanks,

Confused Person

    This topic has been closed for replies.
    Correct answer davescm

    I am not a lawyer and do not work for Adobe so the following views are my own.

    I doubt you will see a straight yes or no to this question at present. Copyright and generative AI is a bit of a minefield at present with various cases progressed through the courts challenging ownership, and even the ability to copyright images that were generated by typing in text prompts. Example in this article: https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/ai-generator-art-text-us-copyright-policy-1234661683/

     

    I don't know what you mean by copyright locked. Commercial use by generative AI in beta software was, and still is prohibited. Commercial use by gen AI in the released software is 'designed to be safe for commercial use' as stated here : https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/whats-new/2024.html#gen-ai-photoshop

     

    Adobe's terms, referring to copyright,  are here (revised in September)
    https://www.adobe.com/legal/licenses-terms/adobe-gen-ai-user-guidelines.html

    https://www.adobe.com/content/dam/cc/en/legal/servicetou/Adobe-Generative-AI-Additional-Terms_en_US_20230908.pdf

     

    If you need specific advice on generative AI and copyright then you should talk to a copyright lawyer.

     

    Dave

    2 replies

    D Fosse
    Community Expert
    D FosseCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    September 17, 2023

    Copyright has nothing to do with Adobe or beta vs. production.

     

    The short answer:

    https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/19/23838458/ai-generated-art-no-copyright-district-court 

     

    The gray zones:

    https://builtin.com/artificial-intelligence/ai-copyright 

      M
      MisterGeorge'
      Participant
      June 21, 2024

      Thanks for this. This excerpt was interesting:

      The U.S. Copyright Office’s stance on excluding machines from being considered authors could throw a wrench in the Stable Diffusion lawsuit and many others, according to Rob Heverly, an associate professor at Albany Law School who specializes in the intersection of technology and law.

      “In order for there to be infringement, there has to be an author. So, if there isn’t an author, I don’t know that there can be infringement,” Heverly told Built In. “If we’re not going to hold the technology maker liable for the technology itself, then the creator of the output is the AI. But we’ve already said they’re not an author. So if they’re not an author then they can’t create an infringing work.”

      !


        davescm
        Community Expert
        davescmCommunity ExpertCorrect answer
        Community Expert
        September 17, 2023

        I am not a lawyer and do not work for Adobe so the following views are my own.

        I doubt you will see a straight yes or no to this question at present. Copyright and generative AI is a bit of a minefield at present with various cases progressed through the courts challenging ownership, and even the ability to copyright images that were generated by typing in text prompts. Example in this article: https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/ai-generator-art-text-us-copyright-policy-1234661683/

         

        I don't know what you mean by copyright locked. Commercial use by generative AI in beta software was, and still is prohibited. Commercial use by gen AI in the released software is 'designed to be safe for commercial use' as stated here : https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/whats-new/2024.html#gen-ai-photoshop

         

        Adobe's terms, referring to copyright,  are here (revised in September)
        https://www.adobe.com/legal/licenses-terms/adobe-gen-ai-user-guidelines.html

        https://www.adobe.com/content/dam/cc/en/legal/servicetou/Adobe-Generative-AI-Additional-Terms_en_US_20230908.pdf

         

        If you need specific advice on generative AI and copyright then you should talk to a copyright lawyer.

         

        Dave

          A
          ArenlionAuthor
          Participant
          September 17, 2023

          Oh yes I know, it's the wild wild west right now, precisely why I came here to try and understand where we stand with Adobe.

           

          quote

          Commercial use by generative AI in beta software was, and still is prohibited. Commercial use by gen AI in the released software is 'designed to be safe for commercial use' as stated here : https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/whats-new/2024.html#gen-ai-photoshop

           

          Thank you, this is what I was looking for! Along with the first article as well.

           

          Really not sure how I missed the Adobe one there; I had only seen the talks of the many court cases.

          Leslie Moak Murray
          Community Expert
          Leslie Moak MurrayCommunity Expert
          Community Expert
          September 18, 2023

          'As an artist I can tell you I am the copyright holder and NOBODY ELSE.'

          Just for clarity of other readers (I'm sure you know this Leslie) as the artist you do indeed hold the copyright to your images, but if those images were made with generative AI (again I know that you create yours yourself Leslie) then you may not, according to the US legal cases mentioned above. What a minefield!

           

          '.........the other day I got a payment for it'

          At least Adobe made a payment, some AI generators have been scraping the internet for images to learn from with no such payments forthcoming.

           

          Dave


          As you said, it's indeed a minefield at the moment. But no matter what any judge might say, the original creator is the rightful owner of the intellectual property (as if ethics atter anymore).  As to those who use this software and sell it and bill themselves as "digital artists," you are not an artist. You're a typist.

          -edit typo

            Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
            Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices