Pourquoi Adobe demande-t-il une autorisation de droit à l'image pour une photo générée par IA?

[Mendenics]

Je soumets des photos de portraits, je coche la case "Créé à l’aide d’outils d’IA générative" et je réponds "non" à "Des personnes ou des biens reconnaissables ?" (puisque chaque image est créée sans aucune référence à des personnes existantes).

Pourtant, Abode rétorque systématiquement qu'il manque une "autorisation de droit à l'image". 

Est-ce un bug? Pourquoi avoir prévu une case IA s'il n'en est pas tenu compte ensuite?

Je suis perplexe.

[Jill_C · Accepted solution]

The requirement for model releases or property releases is clearly described in the Adobe Help Pages for Generative AI:

https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/generative-ai-content.html

If the human figures in your illustrations are based on real people, you need a model release. If they're fully AI generated you need a property release.

[Mendenics]

I understand what you say, but in order to upload a property release, the only way is to check "yes" at the question "Des personnes ou des biens reconnaissables ?", which is absurd. My images are fully AI generated. Any resemblance would be a coincidence, just like there are lookalikes of people in real photos…

Abode isn't entirely clear on this issue, to say the least. I have not encountered this problem on other equally serious sales sites.

[Jill_C]

If you read the Help Page that I linked above, you will see that Adobe is quite clear on this issue. Adobe doesn't know whether you based your Generative AI asset on a real person or not, thus the following rules:

Do: Upload property releases for illustrations depicting generated people. Learn more about property releases.

Don’t: Submit works based on real people unless you have a valid model release for that person. Learn more about model releases. 

[Abambo]

Abode isn't entirely clear on this issue, to say the least.

By @Mendenics

Adobe is very clear:

• Modelled after a real person: model release.
• Modelled after no real person: property release.

How can the moderator guess, that you did not use a real living model to create your generative AI? They will need the facts, and not to assume, that when you do not submit a model release, it's a fake person. This is obvious, and you should simply do as required. If it's fake, do your property release, and it's OK. You are the property owner in that case, and the picture is your property.

[RALPH_L]

Because there is a leagal issue on who owns the rights to the image.
You or the owner of the software that created the image.
By adding a property release, you are saying you own the rights to the image and are
granting usage.

[Nancy OShea]

1. Generative AI Illustrations are NOT photos.  They are Illustrations. 

2.  Title, keyword and description must contain "generative AI Illustration" so customers know exactly what they're buying.

3. Illustrations containing a human likeness must be accompanied by a signed release form. 

Real person = Model Release signed by the human it is based on.

Fake person = Property Release signed by you as creator of the artwork.

===========
Model/Property Releases:
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/model-release.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/property-release.html

On average, Generative AI Illustrations take 1-3 months for review due to the immense backlog of AI submissions.

Hope that helps.  Post back if you have more questions.

[Mendenics]

That Generative AI images are not photos is not obvious. It is how Adobe seems to work, but nobody could guess that, especially since it is a distinction that only Adobe practice.

Besides, if Generative AI images are "illustrations" and not "photos", why does Adobe allow to label them photos AND Generative AI? That makes no sense, and that's why so many people are confused. Adobe's system should impose that all Generative AI images be labelled illustrations, and that would be much simpler. My guess is that if it is not so, it's because Adobe is still not clear about the massive arrival of AI images.

[Nancy OShea]

Photos come from a camera.  AI is not a camera, it's a machine.

Carefully read Stock's requirements for submitting AI.  If you don't understand them, post back with specific questions. 

Generative AI:
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/generative-ai-content.html
===========
Model/Property Releases:
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/model-release.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/property-release.html

[Mendenics]

Your statement "Photos come from a camera. AI is not a camera, it's a machine" is highly dubious. A camera is a machine too; furtheremore, images from a camera can now be modified, transformed, retouched, manipulated without limits thanks to… Adobe Photoshop, which also uses AI, and so is a "machine" too. All these quibbles seem mainly intended to protect the interests of Abode, without saying so.
Anyway, it doesn't shock me that Abode looks after its interests; what annoys me are the hypocritical and so-called ethical speeches.

[Jill_C]

From the Adobe Help pages:

"My generative AI image looks like a photograph. Can I submit it as a picture? No. Only content made primarily using a camera can be submitted as a picture. Images made with generative AI tools, even if they look like photographs, must be submitted as illustrations. "

I hardly think pointing out the difference between a photograph and a Generative AI asset is a "quibble". It's a very important distinction, one that will become more and more important as AI infiltrates every aspect of our lives...

[Nancy OShea]

A camera is a machine too...

By @Mendenics

========

1. Gaslighting us with random talking points doesn't change anything.

2. We don't work for Adobe. We don't make the Contributor rules. This is user-to-user community.

3. Adobe makes the Contributor rules.  Read the Stock Contributor TERMS  you agreed to when you joined.  Either follow Adobe Stock's rules or don't play here.  Simple.

4. You'll learn soon enough if you have what it takes or not.  Most are here one day and gone the next.  There are plenty more contributors to take your place.

I think we're done here.

[Jill_C]

I agree with you on this point. Currently the Submission page allows you select "Photos or Illustrations" as the "File Type" and then you must check the "created using Generative AI tools" check box. It would make sense to disallow the Contributor to Select File Type "Photos" if they've checked the "Generative AI tools" checkbox. This would certainly reduce the error rate of assets being incorrectly categorized as "Photos". Buyers have certainly complained about something being called a "photo" when it's not!

[Mendenics]

I agree. Plus, "photos" is dubious too. If Abode was honest, it should ask if any submitted photo has been modified, transformed, retouched, manipulated, which is now possible without limits thanks to… Adobe Photoshop, which also uses AI.

[Abambo]

I agree. Plus, "photos" is dubious too. If Abode was honest, it should ask if any submitted photo has been modified, transformed, retouched, manipulated, which is now possible without limits thanks to… Adobe Photoshop, which also uses AI.

By @Mendenics

But any photo has been manipulated in some way, to be eligible to be on stock. I have no picture that did not pass through my processing. Stock is not the National Geographic.