5 ms·

Private people who agreed that Getty would manage their distribution and compensate them when their image was used by one of Getty's clients, yes. So yeah, not

Private people who agreed that Getty would manage their distribution and compensate them when their image was used by one of Getty's clients, yes. So yeah, not only is it very much Getty's content to distribute, but Stability AI is absolutely screwing over thousands of little guys by not paying royalties too...

tyingq 4y ago
Some of that, but Getty also repackages images with licenses that allow it. And sometimes then acts like it "owns" those images by harassing others that use the same original source, including the original copyright owner. That's not especially relevant to the article, but helpful to understand a lot of what's there isn't their IP to manage.
- VanTheBrand 4y ago
  That’s the minority of their images and also if it’s the version from their server with their watermark on it, it actually is their IP to manage. So as you said it’s not especially relevant and it’s very clear stability didn’t limit its scraping of Getty to these kinds of images. Getty in other instances being jerks doesn’t make them wrong here.
  - tyingq 4y ago
    >That’s the minority of their images It's difficult to find any source that would prove or disprove that. I can find references that they changed 35 million images to "royalty free" in 2014. The examples I can find of those are things like this: https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/mcs/media/images/73409000/jpg/_73409443_1e3b6fe6-c85b-4b52-96a9-3b7d6e547ef5.jpg https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/mcs/media/images/73409000/... Which appears to be a public domain image. Or this $499 image from Getty: https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/floyd-burroughs-sharecropper-by-walker-evans-news-photo/544162314 https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/floyd-burrough... Free from the Library of Congress: https://www.loc.gov/item/00651772/ https://www.loc.gov/item/00651772/ (including the 50MB tiff that appears to be the highest resolution avaialable)
judge2020 4y ago
The crux of the issue is whether Stable Diffusion is 'learning' like a human would be if they just scrolled through Getty Images or someone's DeviantArt to learn to draw and copy their style (a style is not copyrightable). This is why Getty Images' claim is that Stable Diffusion is a "collage tool", while SD will most likely argue on the basis of the AI being capable of exhibiting the same level of creativity as a human.
- TillE 4y ago
  It's best understood as an extremely sophisticated collage tool. We can make vague analogies about how training ML models is sort of like human learning, but ultimately it's not actually that. It will still spit out stuff like watermarks and product photos unprompted, because its "learning" is still fundamentally mindless. It works strictly in the realm of pixels, it has no mechanism for understanding context.
  - andybak 4y ago
    So "extremely sophisticated" that the word "collage" takes on an almost entirely new meaning. So, not really.
  - gpderetta 4y ago
    My understanding is that it doesn't in fact work in the domain of pixels, but I'm far from an expert.
  - bioemerl 4y ago
    It's really really not best understood as a sophisticated collage tool. You can't take a person and turn them into a cartoon if you're just pasting existing parts of images together. Stable diffusion understands what is a cartoon and it understands what is you (assuming you train it on your face). It spits out watermarks because it understands that watermarks appear in images and it's going to try to reproduce the watermarks if you ask for something that tends to have a watermark in it.
- martynr 4y ago
  This seems totally irrelevant to the case in my view, which is whether Stability Ai had the right to use Getty’s content for training in the manner that they allegedly did.

tyingq 4y ago

Some of that, but Getty also repackages images with licenses that allow it. And sometimes then acts like it "owns" those images by harassing others that use the same original source, including the original copyright owner. That's not especially relevant to the article, but helpful to understand a lot of what's there isn't their IP to manage.

VanTheBrand 4y ago
That’s the minority of their images and also if it’s the version from their server with their watermark on it, it actually is their IP to manage. So as you said it’s not especially relevant and it’s very clear stability didn’t limit its scraping of Getty to these kinds of images. Getty in other instances being jerks doesn’t make them wrong here.
- tyingq 4y ago
  >That’s the minority of their images It's difficult to find any source that would prove or disprove that. I can find references that they changed 35 million images to "royalty free" in 2014. The examples I can find of those are things like this: https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/mcs/media/images/73409000/jpg/_73409443_1e3b6fe6-c85b-4b52-96a9-3b7d6e547ef5.jpg https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/mcs/media/images/73409000/... Which appears to be a public domain image. Or this $499 image from Getty: https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/floyd-burroughs-sharecropper-by-walker-evans-news-photo/544162314 https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/floyd-burrough... Free from the Library of Congress: https://www.loc.gov/item/00651772/ https://www.loc.gov/item/00651772/ (including the 50MB tiff that appears to be the highest resolution avaialable)

judge2020 4y ago

The crux of the issue is whether Stable Diffusion is 'learning' like a human would be if they just scrolled through Getty Images or someone's DeviantArt to learn to draw and copy their style (a style is not copyrightable). This is why Getty Images' claim is that Stable Diffusion is a "collage tool", while SD will most likely argue on the basis of the AI being capable of exhibiting the same level of creativity as a human.

TillE 4y ago
It's best understood as an extremely sophisticated collage tool. We can make vague analogies about how training ML models is sort of like human learning, but ultimately it's not actually that. It will still spit out stuff like watermarks and product photos unprompted, because its "learning" is still fundamentally mindless. It works strictly in the realm of pixels, it has no mechanism for understanding context.
- andybak 4y ago
  So "extremely sophisticated" that the word "collage" takes on an almost entirely new meaning. So, not really.
- gpderetta 4y ago
  My understanding is that it doesn't in fact work in the domain of pixels, but I'm far from an expert.
- bioemerl 4y ago
  It's really really not best understood as a sophisticated collage tool. You can't take a person and turn them into a cartoon if you're just pasting existing parts of images together. Stable diffusion understands what is a cartoon and it understands what is you (assuming you train it on your face). It spits out watermarks because it understands that watermarks appear in images and it's going to try to reproduce the watermarks if you ask for something that tends to have a watermark in it.
martynr 4y ago
This seems totally irrelevant to the case in my view, which is whether Stability Ai had the right to use Getty’s content for training in the manner that they allegedly did.