All the many machine learning projects are based on exactly the same thing: from already existing data, they can generate others with similar characteristics. Thus, an AI like Dall-E or Midjourney is based on existing images to create new ones.
[Crea una streamer con Inteligencia Artificial, y termina baneada por negar el Holocausto]
This has opened the door to many debates about intellectual property and the real ability of these systems to “create something new”. There is someone directly call the creators of these AI thieves for unauthorized use of images that are not their own, often with the express intent of impersonating an artist or photographer.
Lawsuit against Artificial Intelligence
Well, this moral debate will soon become a legal debate, if the lawsuit announced by Getty Images goes to court. Getty Images is one of the largest stock content providers on the market, used by countless traditional and online media outlets. The average user will know this name from the watermark that appears on many images when we search on Google, indicating that we have to pay to use the full photo.
Getty Images now claims that the creators of Stable Diffusion, one of the most widely used AI tools, their photographs were stolen to train your system and generate similar images. They believe the developers have used someone else’s intellectual property for a commercial product, without receiving (or asking) permission; based on this, they started the formal process to start the trial in the UK.
Some images created with Stable Diffusion have the Getty watermark
That Stable Diffusion uses Getty images is obvious. As revealed in The edgeit is easy to find the company watermark on images created with this AI model, clearly indicating that the Getty images are in the database used.
This demand could be the spark that will ignite the AI industry, which has grown so much in just a few months. As we said, all these projects are based on content already created, and if a judge decides that such use is illegal, it is very likely that other similar lawsuits will be initiated; it is very likely that many projects will shut down if this happens.
However, from Getty they claim that their end goal is not that. While it might seem like Getty has an interest in seeing the technology go away (since it’s a cheaper alternative to paying for stock footage), its CEO Craig Peters compares it to the difference between Spotify and the pirate programs like Napster or eMule. In the same way that Spotify negotiated with the rights holders of the songs to be able to distribute them, she believes that a “negotiation” is necessary, and that the lawsuit is a way to force her.
You may be interested
- They created an AI that responds to emails for you, no more apologies
- The artificial intelligence behind robot vacuums and how it helps leave your home spotless
- LG OLED TVs for 2023 improve picture with artificial intelligence
- Samsung’s new app uses AI to enhance your photos like “magic”
Follow the topics that interest you
