Account suspended - waiting times?

[c15C3]

Hi everyone, as is happening to many, they suspended my account, after about 2 weeks they replied:

Your account was blocked after we noticed that you have submitted Generative Ai content that is not within our guidelines.

You have submitted files that refer to famous artists, people, characters from popular culture, and/or other existing subjects such as video games in the image, title or keywords. We take intellectual property rights very seriously and your uploads are a violation of these rights and thus violate the upload guidelines.

Your account will remain blocked until further notice

----------

from the answer it's only temporary, but they didn't give me a time frame, does anyone have experience with this? How long after did they reactivate the account?

however this wild blocking policy is not nice at all, why don't you get notified about what you did wrong and even now I don't know what I sent to be blocked, isn't their job precisely to filter the images that are not good? one cannot know everything that is protected by rights etc. it is impossible to never make a mistake.

adobe earns on our work, plus firely is trained on our images "I just got the bonus for that too", and my approval rate is also high.

without our photos adobe stock would not exist, treating collaborators like this is not nice.-

zero assistance, if you write they don't respond, there is a really big problem that they don't want to solve.

it almost seems like they don't want to work and instead of rejecting the wrong images "by mistake" they just block you so they have less work to do

but is it possible that no one does anything?

[Abambo]

With 4000 AI files, I was in the block for 3 weeks. I think Adobe is making a mistake by blocking us retroactively after accepting the file. This is not logical. If the file is problematic, it should not be accepted immediately. This is just some kind of totalitarianism in which people have no rights. We need to fight this!

By @Sergii5CEA

Adobe has all rights to block you (or me or anyone else) because we accepted the contributor's terms and conditions. Whatever you think, a company is not a democraty, it is, as you rightful point out totalitarism. And you indeed have no rights, or let me say, you have the rights, the laws give to you. But as a supplier, and having accepted the terms and conditions, they can block you for no reason at all. If they block you for a reason, they even do not need to pay you. You did agree to this.

From a stock customer point of view: When I licence bad assets, those bad assets easily cost me thousands of dollars, so they get very angry when Adobe accepts bad assets. The blocking is kind of emergency break, to protect the customers.

You as a contributor are considered to be professional enough to submit only quality assets. For suppliers, my company holds a black list of suppliers who did in the past delivered bad assets or did not meet the deadlines. They won't sell anymore to my company. That's business.

[Ladli30887878fult]

KEEP CALM AND DO OTHER THINGS THEY HAVE ENOGH CONTRIBUTORS SO THEY DON'T CARE... ITS TRUE AND HARSH REALITY. 

[emcstock]

So for the phenomena that blame the contributors, are you saying that now they are all idiots, and that you are never wrong? coincidentally there was a boom in blocked profiles to make up for their mistake, for all the photos they missed. I've been selling photos for 15 years, first photographs and now generated bon AI, both here and on another famous site that accepts them, guess what? Everything works great there, if you make a mistake it gets rejected and if you send a lot of rubbish and there are a lot of refusals the number of images you can send decreases, they explain to you what you did wrong and so you learn. "ah they are the same photos sent on adobe stock". so simply those of Adobe Stock, in addition to working badly because they don't check the photos, have a completely wrong blocking policy. and the worst thing they trained Firely on our images and then blocked you This ridiculous problem and these massive blocks are only made by Adobe stock, wake up!!!

[Sergii5CEA]

I’ve also been in this industry since 2008 and not a single photo stock has ever blocked anyone. The most strict of all, Getty Images, checked everything for a long time and carefully, and if you accepted the work, then everything is in order and you can be calm - this is a serious approach to business and respect for the authors.

[Abambo]

I’ve also been in this industry since 2008 and not a single photo stock has ever blocked anyone.

By @Sergii5CEA

That's not true. Other stock agencies have also active blocking policies. What is true, however, is that currently a lot of accounts here get blocked, because they spammed the system with bad assets. The blocking should have probably happening earlier. 

I can't however, talk about a specific case, as I do not know what assets and quality you submitted. I can only talk about what I've seen over the months in contributors' portfolios.

[Abambo]

You are free not to contribute to Adobe stock. Use that freedom. 

There are only fellow contributors discussing here. So with "you" you are not adressing Adobe.

As a 15-years veteran, some mistakes can't be done anymore. The generative AI goldrush is over. Customers are complaining about the rubbish submitted and are as angry about you and your assets and about Adobe accepting that, as you are because you got blocked for bad assets.

At a first, it's the contributor's task to upload only high quality assets. 

[daniellei4510]

"isn't their job precisely to filter the images that are not good?"

No. That is the job of the contributors. We must become our own moderators, especially when it comes to AI. Unfortunately, human nature is such that we are our own worst critics and this has caused numerous issues for both Adobe and contributors. I have seen a number of posts where people who have been submitting photographs successfully for years have decided to dabble in AI and are at a loss as to why their images are being rejected...or sometimes even causing temporary or potentially permanent bans. But AI is not something to "dabble" in from a professional standpoint. It needs to be taken every bit as seriously as photography when it comes to editing and scrutinising images.

100% of my submissions are AI (although my life-long background has been in photography). Despite being extremely careful about what assets I submit, it is still unnerving when I read posts from people who have had their accounts blocked for issues related to AI. Am I next? I certainly hope not.

I use Midjourney as my main source for creating AI. While one can pay extra to have their prompts hidden from public view, the vast majority of users do not do so, and their prompts are readily available. I've seen prompts that include "award winning photograph," "Pulitzer prize winning," "Nicole Kidman as," "Cosmopolitan magazine model," etc., all of which can potentially result in images that are almost pixel by pixel duplicates of existing copyrighted images.

So it isn't enough just to avoid referencing other artists or their styles. General prompts like this should definitely be avoided as well. Not that this has anything to do with individual cases in this particular thread. We simply don't know, since people rarely in these cases upload images that were rejected or that they feel may have caused the rejection or ban.

I'm going to bed now. 🙂

[Abambo]

I'm going to bed now. 🙂

By @daniellei4510

Great idea.

And yes, it is indeed the contributor who should not submit bad assets. This stock is not a thing to make you a better contributor or photographer. You are considered being a professional checking your pictures and correcting your pictures accordingly. And you are supposed to submit a low number of assets that get refused.

Moderation is only in place to protect the buyer from bad assets.