scottyLogJobs

scottyLogJobs t1_j7llrrl wrote

Why? Compare the top two images. It is a demonstration that they trained on Getty images but there’s no way anyone could argue that the nightmare fuel on the right deprives Getty of any money. Do you remember when Getty sued Google images and won? Sure Google is powerful and makes plenty of money, but now image search is way worse for consumers than it was a decade ago- you can’t just open the image or even a link to the image, you have to follow it back to their page and dig around for it, probably never finding it at all. Ridiculous that effectively embedding a link isn’t considered fair use, you’d still need to pay to use a Getty image 🤷‍♂️

Setting aside the fact that Getty is super hypocritical and constantly violates copyright law, and then effectively uses their litigators to push around smaller groups, if they win it’s just going to be another step that means only the big companies have access to data, making it impossible for smaller players to compete.

People fighting against technological advancement and innovation are always on the wrong side of history. There will always be a need for physical artists, digital artists, photographers, etc, because the value of art is already incredibly subjective, the value is generated by the artist, not the art, and client needs are so specific, detailed and iterative that an AI can’t achieve them.

Instead of seeing this tool as an opportunity for artists, they fight hopelessly against innovation and throw their lot in with huge bully companies like Getty Images.

4