Getty Images CEO Calls AI Training Models ‘Pure Theft’
The CEO of Getty Images has penned a column in which he calls the practice of scraping photos and other content from the open web by AI companies “pure theft”.
Writing for Fortune, Craig Peters argues that fair use rules must be respected and that AI training practices are in contravention of those rules.
Peters’s company Getty has a vested interest as it is currently embroiled in a major lawsuit in the U.S. and the U.K. after it sued Stability AI, the makers of AI image generator Stable Diffusion.
“I am responsible for an organization that employs over 1,700 individuals and represents the work of more than 600,000 journalists and creators worldwide,” writes Peters. “Copyright is at the very core of our business and the livelihood of those we employ and represent.”
Peters goes on to say that Getty “did not grant Stability AI permission to use millions of images owned and/or represented by Getty Images”. He then lists the fair use criteria.
1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is in the public interest.
2. The nature of the copyrighted work.
3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole.
4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Peters says that AI models that generate music, photos, or videos based on text prompts are “clearly” a breach of the first and fourth criteria of fair use.
“These models are being trained on the content of artists absent their permission, commercialized by companies targeting the very same end markets from which those artists make their living,” says Peters. “It’s pure theft from one group for the financial benefit of another.”
Peters compares the current situation to that of the original Napster peer-to-peer file-sharing network that has long since been replaced by streaming services such as Netflix and Spotify.
“There is a fair path that rewards creativity and delivers the promises of AI,” adds Peters. “Let’s stop the rhetoric that all un-permissioned AI training is legal and that any requirement to respect the rights of creators is at the expense of AI as a technology.”
You can read Peters’s article on Fortune.
Image credits: Header photo licensed via Depositphotos.
