[madeofpalk]

What Getty's done I think is the most "artist" friendly version of this.

Presumably when photographers/artists submit their images to Getty they hand over full ownership, or otherwise pretty broad licensing agreement. If Getty's the rights holders for these images they can use that by training their own models.

In my mind, OpenAI/Midjourney/Stable Diffusion are the Napsters of generative AI. Adobe Firefly, and now Getty, are coming up with the iTunes Store/Spotify. For better or worse.

[thfuran]

It's legal but not particularly friendly to hold someone to a prior agreement like "you can mostly do what you want with X" when what it's possible to do with X significantly changes.

[Trombone12]

Hey, at least Getty handed over some money as the basis for that claim, OpenAI et all are leaning on "our scraper brought it back" to maker their version of that exact claim.

[pimlottc]

I think it would be more accurate to describe this as the most Getty-friendly version.

[madeofpalk]

I guess in the same way you could quibble about whether Spotify is artist friendly or record label friendly, when faced with torrenting.

[tensor]

I don't think there is any "quibble" involved in whether record labels are good or bad for artists. And claiming that the alternative is "torrenting" is really throwing in a huge strawman.

The alternative to Spotify and the traditional record labels are places like Bandcamp, where artists get a far more significant portion of the earned money. Any industry where 99% of the money goes to the middle man or service provider rather than the creator is an industry in dire need of disruption.

My limited understanding is that Getty is at least as bad as the music industry, if not much worse. No doubt Getty will make millions of dollars from their AI image generator, while the artists may get a few cents a year if they are lucky.

edit: also, re spotify, as far as I'm aware they do carry small and independent labels. Getty is comparable to the big music labels, not to spotify.

[chankstein38]

Anyone can, through a service such as DistroKid, publish their music on spotify without a label. You can even enter your own label name so yeah spotify very much seems pretty label agnostic. Not sure how much the big labels end up paying them at the end of the day though.

[Palmik]

Very different -- Spotify significantly increased the amount of music people consume, and the amount of artists that can get easily compensated (listing on Spotify is much easier than releasing a CD).

In this case: Getty is going to be paying less overall (otherwise, why do it at all?), and they will pocket the extra margin.

[chankstein38]

Right? Isn't this effectively what the actor's guild was striking about just in photographer form?