how to avoid ai art?

It would be great to have a way to filter all of this out. Adobe used to be a reliable resource for quality stock images. The AI images are far, far from quality!

Adobe's reputation is going to get ruined by this. Please restrict or at least have an option for us to filter out the AI art.

I agree, I need a filter to filter out AI generated art, it looks okay far away, but once you zoom in there is often missing fingers or distortion that is uncomfortable and definetly not good for commercial use. 

I agree. AI art needs to be clearly flagged.

I love generating AI art, but I will never upload any to Adobe Stock as is, though I may use compositions, elements and take inspiration from it. Even if many of them are, in my view, unique and original enough to allow them to pass all tests allowing a new copyright to be generated. Prompting, selecting and evolving images, unlike what some people might think, can be a time-consuming and deeply creative process that requires a skilled artist's imagination and critical eye to glean great results.

But, as long as the general copyright status of AI art is not fully established, it remains in a bit of a grey area when it comes to the contributor rules being that you ascertain that you and only you have the intellectual property rights to the images you upload. This is extra important since it is potentially being licensed for commercial use, meaning any AI image later found to be derivative can retroactively cause anyone using it commercially to be liable for infringement damages, and additional licensing and penalties from other rights holders, or the expense of tangible goods having to be destroyed for displaying it.

In forums and the public Midjourney gallery, I have seen a lot of AI artwork infringing trademarks, famous people's right to their own image, as well as other elements of intellectual property that would never pass as fair use in a copyright trial. And something many don't even take into consideration when using AI is that by specifically prompting for something containing named people, trademarks, and artists, the evidence against them will be that any similarity found is deliberate and not coincidental. That could be legally important as intent to infringe weighs very heavily in infringement cases, where the defendant's best line of defence will inevitably be the plausibility of never having seen or directly copied the image theirs visually bears more than passing similarity to.

There is absolutely no guarantee an AI image uploaded here on Adobe Stock doesn't infringe something, even if it isn't directly known to the contributor. The only guarantee is that the contributor will be liable in case it turns out they didn't have the rights to license the image for commerical use. The bottom line is that anyone uploading AI images could potentially find themselves in very expensive legal trouble, and they ignore the uncertain copyright status of AI images at their peril.

But, this also makes it important that Adobe Stock users have a clear and obvious way of distinguishing whether an image is AI-generated or not. All AI images being flagged as such, and a user actively having to choose whether to include them in a search with the default being "off" seems reasonable to me, for instance.

Even if liability falls on the contributor. I think everyone in the chain of events from an AI is trained to an image is generated, used, and found to be too similar to something in the training set, would rather prefer to avoid any legal difficulties that can ensue from the uncertain status that AI art currently has.

If AI art is going to stay on Adobe Stock's platform, I 100% agree it should be clearly labeled, or even sorted into its own category (alongside photos, illustrations, and vectors). I certainly think at least some of these images probably do not follow copyright laws correctly, which is also a major concern. Adobe Stock should be a leader in resolving these ethical issues, or else it will quickly fall behind other stock image sites which are less overwhelmed by artificial intelligence synthesis-imagery

Speaking as a digital artist, I see a lot of uses for AI-generated assets in my own projects, although I view it more as enhancement rather than art.  AI-generated images are bringing to art what CGI  brought to motion pictures.  Neither one are going away anytime soon. AI is a sophisticated tool that rightfully belongs in the artist's arsenal alongside paints, pastels, brushes, cameras and software.  Photoshop contains AI-assisted technologies.  So I see this as the next logical extension to the tools we currently use.

I fear not every artist will use AI correctly or is taking necessary steps to ensure they have sufficient copyright to sell their AI-generated assets commercially.  Midjourney's free service does not include copyright, one must purchase at least a 2nd tiered subscription for that.  And Midjorney maintains shared copyright to use the assets on their platform.  Artists wishing to remove assets from public use must pay additional fees to Midjourney.

The AI prompt creation process is itself tedious trial & error.  Many new artists opt to use prompts and assets created by other artists as a starting point.  This introduces other legitimacy concerns.  What exactly do artists have copyright to?   It's unclear.

Getty Images has banned the sale of AI-generated artwork through its service.  Similar image synthesis bans are occurring on smaller art community sites  which found their sites flooded with AI-generated work that threatened to overwhelm artwork created without the use of those tools.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/09/fearing-copyright-issues-getty-images-bans-ai-generated-artwork/

"Shutterstock allows AI-generated artwork on its site (and although Vice recently reported the site was removing AI artwork, we still see the same amount as before—and Shutterstock's content submission terms have not changed)."

Humans still remain the best judge of what works and what doesn't work artistically.  But AI-generated images deserve classification.  I hope Adobe Stock will eventually embrace AI for what it is and not what it isn't.  I would hate to see a wholesale ban on AI-generated assets.

We are evaluating this issue and appreciate your feedback. I've shared this with our content review team.

There isn't any system in place to mark them as AI art. There is even an ongoing controversy concerning the copyright of such art. Contributors have expressed an interest and buyers have asked questions in this sense. And I do not know if any of the Adobe employees is authorized to make any statement on this. If there is a statement, I would expect this to be a declaration in an official Adobe blog post with a wording that has been cleared by the Adobe legal team. Currently, however, there is no search filter in place, filtering those assets out.

(as you may have guessed: I'm not working for Adobe).