Something tells me their plan is to lobby alongside giants like Adobe to outlaw generative models not trained on privately-held image collections (Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, etc.). This sounds...
Something tells me their plan is to lobby alongside giants like Adobe to outlaw generative models not trained on privately-held image collections (Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, etc.). This sounds good in theory but would result in a world where the ability to work with AI imagery is gatekept by the handful of corporations large enough to license and train on their own databases. Imagine if Photoshop was the only legal image editor, and you had to both pay Adobe and send all your work through their servers for approval to use it. Plus, what are the odds the owners of proprietary systems maintain favorable terms for contributing artists and photographers once they're the only game in town?
The current homebrew wild west approach has its issues for sure, but IMHO it's better to target laws and regulations at the downstream effects -- copyright status of generated images, labor protections for working artists, punishment for abusers -- than to essentially privatize and corporatize the ability of computers to create and manipulate images, which is easily one of the biggest breakthroughs in the history of computing.
Something tells me their plan is to lobby alongside giants like Adobe to outlaw generative models not trained on privately-held image collections (Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, etc.). This sounds good in theory but would result in a world where the ability to work with AI imagery is gatekept by the handful of corporations large enough to license and train on their own databases. Imagine if Photoshop was the only legal image editor, and you had to both pay Adobe and send all your work through their servers for approval to use it. Plus, what are the odds the owners of proprietary systems maintain favorable terms for contributing artists and photographers once they're the only game in town?
The current homebrew wild west approach has its issues for sure, but IMHO it's better to target laws and regulations at the downstream effects -- copyright status of generated images, labor protections for working artists, punishment for abusers -- than to essentially privatize and corporatize the ability of computers to create and manipulate images, which is easily one of the biggest breakthroughs in the history of computing.