Hacker News Reader

Let’s see the art then when it’s not trained on the artists work.

Adobe’s AI image model uses their own licensed photo set and Adobe Stock

Same with Getty’s

is that the approved use then?

So I agree those are at least somewhat better from a moral point of view, but people still can’t use those as justification to keep using other models like Midjourney or Stable Diffusion.

Now back to the morality of the Getty and Adobe models: did those artists know their work was going to be used for training AI art models? From what I understand there are many artists who licensed their art to Adobe Stock who are upset that their work is being used for this purpose.

Keep in mind this is a usage of the art that literally didn’t exist when the artists licensed their art to Adobe. I would argue it’s a fundamentally different use case.

so the goalpost would be for artists and photographers to license their work specifically for being part of a training set?

and once that’s done all arguments disintegrate as people stop going to artists and photographers anymore either way?

Yeah that’s exactly it. Then they’re making money from their work still, and maybe even have an incentive to create new work for AIs to train on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com