I have looked at Shutterstock’s submission guidelines (Shutterstock Submission Guidelines) and see nothing regarding AI art. In fact they state specifically:
You must own or control the copyright to all content you submit to Shutterstock. This means that you cannot submit work obtained from other sources (e.g., online image search results or websites), or incorporate such work into your content submissions, unless you have permission to do so. — Shutterstock Submission Guidelines
Their document is quite clear:
- I most own the content
OR
- control the copyright
HOWEVER they also state with this catch-all clause:
We reserve the right to remove any previously accepted content submission from the Shutterstock library, and reserve the right to reinstate any previously accepted content submission which was later removed by a Shutterstock administrator, at any time for any reason.
So, the reality is that you can follow the rules to the letter with Shutterstock and they can remove images because of course they can, no reason required. Why? Because they told you they can.
The downside to this kind of “oh, here are the rules and by the way, we don’t have to follow them” devolves into corporations making arbitrary decisions with no arbitration. I may have a perfectly acceptable photo of a family at dinnertime, and they may strike it because they are interracial and one has a rainbow pin on them.
Do they have to tell me why? No, because they just said they can remove anything for any reason at any time. I don’t do business with Shutterstock for that and other reasons.
The other issue here is that these tools generate imagery by mining content without authorization from their respective creators.
Yes, I agree, as an artist this does give me pause if and only if the artists did not give authorization. Derivative works from works that are public domain, do not require attribution.
As always, when dealing with capitalism, let the buyer beware (I’m aware this appears to be a jaundiced view, but even I have to accept the reality)
Is it possible all this impacts the license granted by Epic to these works? I don’t know.
As someone with a Midjourney membership, I feel confident that I can use artwork created by it without worry up and until it is ruled that the art violates someones ownership. Predicting the future is difficult and I’m not really concerned ATM.
From Epic’s point of view, I believe they have consulted with lawyers who have pointed out that there is nothing to suggest the lack of ownership. Case closed (until ruled or legislated otherwise).
As I have indicated, what is important to business is the trading in licit goods. Epic asked @FaithBasedGames regarding proof — in doing so it was doing it’s due diligence in assuring that he indeed own the images. At the moment, they do — whether Shutterstock or Getty believe they do is irrelevant.
I think where your concern is that can Midjourney assign ownership to a composite image generated by someones word choices?
At the moment, they can.
I could be misinterpreting things here, but I think it’s too early to say that the copyright issue is adequately resolved.
Agreed. However, at the moment, ownership is resolved until is is either ruled or legislated otherwise.
I do plan on using AI art for items that are easily replaced. My reality is I place low value in the images in case a ruling or law changes ownership.