Adobe says it won't train AI using artists' work. The creators are not convinced.

WhatsApp Group Join Now
Telegram Group Join Now
Instagram Group Join Now

When users first learned about Adobe's new terms of service (which were quietly updated in February), there was an uproar. Adobe told users it could access their content “both automatically and manually” and use “techniques such as machine learning” to optimize. [Adobe’s] services and software.” Many took the update to mean the company was forcing users to give unlimited access to its work, for the purposes of training Adobe's generative AI, called Firefly.

Late Tuesday, Adobe issued a clarification: In an updated version of its terms of service agreement, it promised not to train AI on its users' content stored locally or in the cloud, and users to opt-out of content analytics.

Caught in the crossfire of intellectual property lawsuits, the vague language used to first update the terms highlights an atmosphere of deep skepticism among artists, many of whom rely on Adobe for their work. are “They've already broken our trust,” says Jon Lam, a senior storyboard artist at Riot Games, referring to how award-winning artist Brian Kissinger created his art style. Discovered photos that were being sold under his name on Adobe's stock image site. His consent Earlier this month, the estate of late photographer Ansel Adams publicly reprimanded Adobe for allegedly selling creative AI copies of his work.

Scott Belsky, Adobe's chief strategy officer, tried to allay those concerns when artists began protesting, clarifying that machine learning refers to the company's non-generative AI tools—Photoshop's “content Overfill” tool, which allows users to seamlessly remove objects from an image. , is one of the many tools used by machine learning. But while Adobe insists that the updated terms do not give the company ownership of the content and that it will never use user content to train Firefly, the misunderstanding raises concerns about the company's market monopoly. It sparked a huge debate and how such a change could threaten the livelihood of artists. anytime. Lam is among the artists who still believe that, despite Adobe's clarification, the company will use work created on its platform to train Firefly without the creators' consent.

Panic over non-consensual use and monetization of copyrighted work by creative AI models is nothing new. Early last year, artist Carla Ortiz was able to use her name to reference images of her work on various generative AI models, a crime that has led to a class action lawsuit against Midgerany, Deviant Art, and Stability AI. The action gave rise to the suit. Ortiz wasn't alone—Polish fantasy artist Greg Rutkowski found that his name was one of the most used clues in Stable Diffusion when the tool first launched in 2022.

As the owner of Photoshop and creator of PDFs, Adobe has reigned as the industry standard for over 30 years, powering the majority of the creative world. An attempt to acquire product design company Figma in 2023 was stalled and abandoned due to antitrust concerns confirming its size.

WhatsApp Group Join Now
Telegram Group Join Now
Instagram Group Join Now

Leave a Comment