8 ms·
Watermark Remover (AI Powered)
- neilv 4y agoI nominate this for the inaugural "Tech Jerks Of The Day Award".
- Tepix 4y agoWhee! Another AI service with ethics implications that will be commonplace (i.e. unstoppable with open source implementations) sooner rather than later. DPReview talks about this service in their article at https://www.dpreview.com/news/0407669255/ai-powered-watermark-removal-poses-uncomfortable-implications-for-content-use https://www.dpreview.com/news/0407669255/ai-powered-watermar... which has already received 300 comments.
- jasonlotito 4y ago> ©2023 Shopsense Retail Technologies Limited That's rich.
- onion2k 4y agoAs far as I can tell, the main winner in the new AI industry boom will be lawyers.
- tutfbhuf 4y agoI think you're talking about AI lawyers.
- ArjenM 4y agoIt always leads back to that half empty warehouse, inhabited solely by robots who suddenly stop doing anything because they all reach singularity and it's most efficient to wait it all out, we don't last as long.
- qikInNdOutReply 4y agoHey, that very thought in all its instances and variations is copyrightous with Disney..
- fxtentacle 4y agoAnd artists. If someone removed your watermark, you can sue for punitive damages in addition to just recovering lost licensing revenue.
- acadapter 4y agoNo, only high-status artists with lawyers
- toomuchtodo 4y agoOperate your ML outside of the jurisdiction. You may not be able to have a corp and get rich, but the LLMs will run somewhere. China, for better or worse, is likely a great place for ML advancement due to their casual take on IP.
- aspyct 4y agoYeah, like I'm going to sue people for a couple bucks off my events photos...
- jeltz 4y agoPunitive damages do not exist in many countries. I think it is mostly a US thing.
- bookofjoe 4y ago"I have never been ruined but twice in my life — once, when I lost a lawsuit, and once when I won one."—Voltaire
- breck 4y agoThe AI boom makes it crystal clear that (c)opywrong laws are idiotic and unjust. It's time to pass the #FreedomToPublish Amendment to the U.S. Constitution getting rid of (c)opywrong laws forever: Section 1. Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of this Constitution is hereby repealed. Section 2. Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to publish or peaceably implement ideas.
- UncleEntity 4y agoIf all you want is AI generated content then, yeah, sure.
- PeterBarrett 4y agoPricing? That's a bit rich. Will people who don't want to pay for images pay for this?
- l5870uoo9y 4y agoi also fail to see a market for this, but 50K installs on android and close to 1200 likes on product hunt suggests that there might be
- halfjoking 4y agoThere’s probably a huge market of people that haven’t kept up with the AI boom, and they don’t know free tools exist for this. HN isn’t that market. I never used it for watermarks but llama-cleaner is one - it worked pretty well at removing text. https://github.com/Sanster/lama-cleaner https://github.com/Sanster/lama-cleaner
- bravoetch 4y agoSeems like a post-scarcity race to the bottom. The question is whether we can encumber post-scarce resources with IP in a meaningful way for much longer.
- Pxtl 4y agoBruce Sterling said it best: "Information wants to be worthless"
- lm28469 4y agoThere is a lot of watermarked content that you can't buy as a digital file, content on redbubble comes to mind for example (stickers. clothing designs, &c.), harvest watermarked art, clean it up, put it for sale somewhere else. I don't think this tool targets well intentioned law abiding, copyright respecting people
- dahart 4y agoI’m not sure I understand what you mean… isn’t harvesting watermarked art from redbubble and selling it somewhere else illegal under copyright law, if you don’t own the product or the image? Did I misunderstand your suggestion? How and when is taking a watermark off something you didn’t create well intentioned and law abiding?
- sgd99 4y agoor just pay for the photos instead?
- fnfontana 4y agoThe content aware fill on Photoshop can do the same thing, actually, there are many AI based solutions to remove watermarks and a considerable amount of them are free to use. Watermarks is no more a stopper for people who don't want to pay for images. Here is an opportunity to inventing new ways to protect stock images.
- vegcel 4y agoStep 1: Create a Watermark remover that requires a business email and card on file to use. Step 2: Create an agency/service owned by the Watermark remover company which works with photographers, artists, etc on hunting down and enforcing licensing deals on large copyright infringers. Supply, meet demand.
- kyaghmour 4y agoNFT to the rescue? :P
- adam12 4y agoThey have a "Caution Notice" on their site that is warning users about fraud. Nothing about copyright infringement, though.
- shanebellone 4y agoSomeone somewhere is excitedly claiming to be a CEO.
- gesman 4y agoNext: FindWatermarkRemovedAndSue.AI
- ape4 4y agoI wonder if it leaves a more discrete watermark or something. EXIF info?
- __MatrixMan__ 4y agoI don't think I'd pay for this, but I would pay for an invisible-watermark remover for protecting whistleblowers and scholarly-journal pirates, ideally for use with PDF's. Although it might be hard to convince me to trust it.
- beepbooptheory 4y agoWhy would we need watermarks anymore when we just have the AI making the art in the first place? People certainly don't think they have like ownership/authorship over AI art right? At least not enough to put a watermark on it I hope.. that would be very funny though, especially if the artist in question doesn't realize the irony.
- aspyct 4y agoNot everything is made by AI.
- beepbooptheory 4y agoRight, I am just saying, I hope stuff like this becomes less needed in general as our relationship to this kind authorship changes. Granted, right now, stuff like this is just needed I guess to steal stuff... But aren't we hoping for a world where individual authorship of art is extinct? Where the need to watermark your work is obsolete because the idea of possessing or authoring a creation is long gone due to the liberating power of the computer as artist? Or am I misunderstanding the coming utopia?
- aspyct 4y agoPhotographer here. If I spend time working for people to take pictures of them during events, I need to get paid for it, otherwise I can't feed myself. However I also need to show them the pictures before they buy it (would you buy a picture without seeing it?), and increasingly that's happening online. So no, "individual authorship of art" will not go extinct as long as people are working for it. Are you expecting to be able to take someone's work without any compensation?
- beepbooptheory 4y agoI certainly think right now we live in that reality, and certainly hope you can continue to feed yourself, but the future is long! I didn't mean to make a big claim about how things are now, or will be in the near future. But just kind of projecting what a world will look like if all these things play out like people are saying it will. But you are right, event photography is a great example, where maybe the only change there is that the watermark will point you to the particular photographer-robot-business you can contract in the future, but the watermark itself will still be necessary to show the quality of the robot. (Don't get me wrong, I don't like this idea at all, its not a good future, and many people will suffer for it. I do like the idea of "Art"-art being de-individualized in the future, to free us from egoistic myths of the "Artist" and all its problems and limitations, but I hate the idea of lots of hard working contractor-types like yourself being without a source of income.)
- aspyct 4y agoI'm a photographer, and I've encountered people who stole my pictures. Believe me, waking up at 5AM, staying up running around all day to take pictures, to then see some people not even pay the price of a lunch for them is... well, doesn't feel great. Thankfully that's a minority of people. What I mean to say is: f*ck people who make such "watermark removal" tools.
- breck 4y ago[flagged]
- aspyct 4y agoWell there's event and event. In my line of event, I sponsor the events so I can be there and sell pictures to the participants. It's just part of life that some people will steal pictures. Doesn't mean I don't enjoy that work though. After all, I'm out doing the thing I love doing. Otherwise yes, I would have stopped doing it. But you know, tradeoffs :) It just makes me quite unhappy that some a*hats on the internet would make stealing pictures easier. That's fully unethical work. It's like if I were selling copies of keys to people's homes and saying "but don't you use them to rob people, yo."
- breck 4y agoIt's literally not stealing though. You have been brainwashed. Stealing is a word that refers to taking physical molecules that have been assigned to one person from another, thus depriving that person of those physical molecules. What you are referring to is slavery: you want to exert control over another person in their own home. You want to prevent a person from sharing information to another person peacefully. That is not stealing, that is slavery, and you are trying to be the master. Those are the real physical terms, if you stop and think about it and do the math. I am not sure if you will understand this—if you are willing to take red pill—as I've found the saying "it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it" to be quite accurate. If your business model depends upon restricting the freedoms of other people, pivot until you have a better business model.
- ShaneMcGowan 4y agoThis is basically like paying for piratebay premium
- SCAQTony 4y agoThere must be a copyright crime in there somewhere.
- a-dub 4y agocharming!
- teliskr 4y agoI recently used this to create a web site design. I wanted to see it without watermarks. Then after the customer approved the design, I purchased the image to use in the implementation of the design.
- egypturnash 4y agoShow HN: I Made An AI-Powered Tool For Stealing Images
- poniko 4y agoIts a race to the bottom, will be interesting to see what has true value in the future.
- maxehmookau 4y agoThis is a weird business. $299/mo gets you 1.6TB worth of watermark removal. What possible, legal use is there for this? That's _millions_ of images. Just, why?
- nicgrev103 4y agoTried it with a basic placeit mockup and it was awful.
- helf 4y agoFinally. I want something like this for video. I’ve been hoping it’ll get added to topaz because I want kill freaking TV channel logos etc
- SteveMoody73 4y agoI've released software which has been pirated, i'm sure that's a common thing that many on this site have experienced. Photography is a hobby of mine. I don't watermark any photos I post online but this is essentially piracy for photos. Tools like this are heading down a dark path.
- freemanofthewan 4y ago"Remove Watermarks from Your Images Quickly and Completely" The use of "your" here is questionable..
- joshilaurain17 4y agoAny trial?
- pointlessone 4y agoPricing? Is this a stock photo store disguised as a watermark removal service? Because, you know, buying a photo will remove the watermark.