And another $0.61 appears in the Contributor Fund column.

What's the justification for not telling the contributor which images were purchased for this usage?

I think images wasn't purchased in the traditional way, but they sell the right for the AI to check all of them to get info from them.

What's the justification for not telling the contributor which images were purchased for this usage?

Probably nowhere near enough space to list them all.

Quote from: wds on December 22, 2022, 13:16

What's the justification for not telling the contributor which images were purchased for this usage?

Probably nowhere near enough space to list them all.

Are you implying that these line items we see correspond to more than one asset?

Quote from: Reimar on December 23, 2022, 19:01

Quote from: wds on December 23, 2022, 18:54

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on December 23, 2022, 04:33

Quote from: wds on December 22, 2022, 13:16

What's the justification for not telling the contributor which images were purchased for this usage?

Probably nowhere near enough space to list them all.

Are you implying that these line items we see correspond to more than one asset?

No images were "purchased".  Parts of our collections were used in training AI in generating new content.  So yes, more than one "asset".

Well one or more of our images were payed for and used for a purpose, I don't see the difference between an image being purchased to use in an ad, an article, or to train some AI....in other words they should still tell us which images were used regardless of purpose....not that it makes any difference in the end.

even more, each image used should count in level determination, and at time of usage, not every 6 months.

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on December 23, 2022, 04:33

Quote from: wds on December 22, 2022, 13:16

What's the justification for not telling the contributor which images were purchased for this usage?

Probably nowhere near enough space to list them all.

Are you implying that these line items we see correspond to more than one asset?

I have no way of knowing either way, but if some people are getting up to $100 payments on a single day then I'd be very, very surprised this isn't from several items/uses. I don't know how much this images cost the buyer, but 10 cents, minus SS's cut, divided by however many dozens or hundreds of items used to train the algorithm... or however it works. That's a lot of slices of the pie. As I say, I don't know the specific but I would have though a new AI image would have drawn from multiple sources to create a new image. 

Got another $ 0.36. So alltogether I have made an impressing $ 0.43. Yeah!

I must be doing g something right if I've beat Wilm. 58 and 25 cents.

Quote from: ouatedeP on December 24, 2022, 07:02

even more, each image used should count in level determination, and at time of usage, not every 6 months.

They aren't counted? How much do we make per use?

We don't know, and we don't know.

Is there any chance of we keeping getting this payment day by day, week by week or month by months??

After all, soon the AI will create images based in our work.

By the way... who is the owner of the copyright when AI creates something?? And specially when this "something" is based in previous copyrighted creations??

Is there any copyright law about AI creating things???

I'm just guessing, like everyone else, that these are make up payments for past licensing in 2022. I don't think they will become daily or anything else, but maybe every six months as SS has told us. Most of that is irrelevant, isn't it? I mean if we get payments twice a year from what's accumulated or once a month, what's the difference.

More important questions are about who owns the rights.

New images are not created based on something previously copyrighted. The new images are based on Machine Learning and the images are new creations. AI doesn't use our images, it uses what the machines has learned about something.

So if the machine has been fed 2,000 images of a Banana, it learns that a banana is is basically, black, or brown, or green or yellow. Then the machine learns what a banana shape is. The machine also learns characteristics of the middle and ends and lines and other parts, maybe the insides as well as other parts or slices or variations of a banana. When someone says they want an image, created by AI that includes a banana, the computer uses everything it knows and creates a new banana. Our images are not directly used.

Who owns the results? That depends on the service someone uses. Open AI / DALL-E2 we own the rights and the images can be used commercially. But Open AI also retains the right to use the image, if they want.

Others you can only use commercially if you paid for the service. And I'm surer there are other versions of the contract.

This will have to go into the courts and be decided, and this is new territory, so there isn't much case law to use for an answer. TBD. One case the courts decided that an AI creation, can't be copyrighted.

However because we enter the words and the software is only a tool, those results are argued to be different.

If anyone wants to read the involved details:  https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4f5fb5fa-b968-4049-8297-0cff617917b5#:~:text=In%202014%20the%20US%20Copyright%20Office%20expressly%20established,IT%20system%20could%20not%20qualify%20for%20copyright%20protection.

"Therefore, it would seem that AI works autonomously produced by the IT system could not qualify for copyright protection. In other words, protection could be granted only when there is human intervention in the process carried out by the AI. After all, one has to bear in mind that the approach toward AI should be based on the key principle according to which the center and focus of the protection is and remain the human being. "

Quote from: Mrblues101 on December 28, 2022, 22:02

Is there any chance of we keeping getting this payment day by day, week by week or month by months??

After all, soon the AI will create images based in our work.

By the way... who is the owner of the copyright when AI creates something?? And specially when this "something" is based in previous copyrighted creations??

Is there any copyright law about AI creating things???

I'm just guessing, like everyone else, that these are make up payments for past licensing in 2022. I don't think they will become daily or anything else, but maybe every six months as SS has told us. Most of that is irrelevant, isn't it? I mean if we get payments twice a year from what's accumulated or once a month, what's the difference.

More important questions are about who owns the rights.

New images are not created based on something previously copyrighted. The new images are based on Machine Learning and the images are new creations. AI doesn't use our images, it uses what the machines has learned about something.

So if the machine has been fed 2,000 images of a Banana, it learns that a banana is is basically, black, or brown, or green or yellow. Then the machine learns what a banana shape is. The machine also learns characteristics of the middle and ends and lines and other parts, maybe the insides as well as other parts or slices or variations of a banana. When someone says they want an image, created by AI that includes a banana, the computer uses everything it knows and creates a new banana. Our images are not directly used.

Who owns the results? That depends on the service someone uses. Open AI / DALL-E2 we own the rights and the images can be used commercially. But Open AI also retains the right to use the image, if they want.

Others you can only use commercially if you paid for the service. And I'm surer there are other versions of the contract.

This will have to go into the courts and be decided, and this is new territory, so there isn't much case law to use for an answer. TBD. One case the courts decided that an AI creation, can't be copyrighted.

However because we enter the words and the software is only a tool, those results are argued to be different.

If anyone wants to read the involved details:  https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4f5fb5fa-b968-4049-8297-0cff617917b5#:~:text=In%202014%20the%20US%20Copyright%20Office%20expressly%20established,IT%20system%20could%20not%20qualify%20for%20copyright%20protection.

"Therefore, it would seem that AI works autonomously produced by the IT system could not qualify for copyright protection. In other words, protection could be granted only when there is human intervention in the process carried out by the AI. After all, one has to bear in mind that the approach toward AI should be based on the key principle according to which the center and focus of the protection is and remain the human being. "

Thank you for your very complete answer.

This is a very new topic and laws are clearly being created now.

I used OpenAI a while ago, but to see the potential of AI writing. It's very impressive as it was able to create some short stories with the information I put. However, as far as I understand this AI was trained with books and texts in the public domain.

This time they used our images that are not in public domain... perhaps this whole issue stems from the fact that SS used our work without proper authorization from us. They have the clearance due to a devious legal trick by updating the terms and conditions and put this new condition on it, but I don't think anyone would have agreed to this deal if we had been explicitly asked.

Quote from: Her Ugliness on December 15, 2022, 02:49

Quote from: Artist on December 14, 2022, 20:29

Where is this option?

It's in your earning summery, but because whoever does the contributor design sucks at his job, you can't see it unless you scroll very far to the right.
https://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings

I was scratching my head to find it and just did before I read this comment. Where did these people learn web design? Awful!

It was weird when I looked at my top performers earlier the numbers seemed right but then I clicked on the "by product" column and the numbers seemed all wrong until I realized I had to click on each type of earning (subscriptions, enhanced, etc) and add them together - I really don't care, I just want the bottom line! And it's already available so why do I need another page to make it confusing?

It was like someone asked, "How many ways can we show you the same thing so that it looks different each time and confuse the #$@ out of contributors?"

I guess the designer charges by the column and page. Really awful.

On a positive note, this afternoon, I uploaded photos and illustrations for the first time in about 11 months, and they were all accepted and online already. Then I looked at my earnings for the first time this month and felt a little queasy that I'd wasted time uploading anything new.

They don't care about how you feel, how comfortable are you with their interface. For them is more important to redirect you to sales pages. No matter you, contributor, you have no value at all and already for a long time. They gave just a clear message for those to whom this was not clear yet.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on December 29, 2022, 12:08

Quote from: Mrblues101 on December 28, 2022, 22:02

I

I'm just guessing, like everyone else, that these are make up payments for past licensing in 2022. I don't think they will become daily or anything else, but maybe every six months as SS has told us. Most of that is irrelevant, isn't it? I mean if we get payments twice a year from what's accumulated or once a month, what's the difference.

More important questions are about who owns the rights. "

the only impact is where the payment fit within the level tiers of SS, and how they affect the "number of download"


Related to the rights, there might be concerns when the original content was editorial and it ends up being modified for misuse.

You're right, we don't know if it's 0, 1 or if any or all of them are counted. Is it a download or something else? Levels are nearly irrelevant when most of the DLs are from the large contracts. Maybe if I had thousands and thousands of downloads a year it could make a difference. 2,500 downloads times .02 = $50 for the whole year.

Original content is NOT modified or used, so I'd say, that's not important or relevant. Images and descriptions are only used to train the AI.