4 ms·
I mean, given their recent liscence kerfuffle it seems clear to me that Adobe really wanted to be able to train on customer data. They had to backpedal, since t
by zrobotics 2y ago
I mean, given their recent liscence kerfuffle it seems clear to me that Adobe really wanted to be able to train on customer data. They had to backpedal, since that generated a surprising amount of controversy. They hold an effective monopoly in certain fields, and their behavior shows they really don't always have customer interests at heart.
Even without customer data to train on, they do have a pretty large moat with their image library. And you are right, they are in a good position VS competitors who trained on data they don't have rights to. We'll have to see how things play out legally, but I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up that something like midjourney ends up in an untenable position. However, openAI has a huge amount of funds that could be redirected to fight a oegal/lobbying battle. While they aren't a direct Adobe competitor, their whole business revolves around using unliscenced data to train their models, so they have a pretty clear horse in this race.
- cma 2y agoSomeone submits one image to their library that they didn't own the rights to and Adobe has to do a completely new training run to remove it, since you can't just delete. Or they just leave it up and admit they didn't need the rights and their library being cleared of rights isn't really a value add.