Ta kontakt med oss

SOCIAL

Can You Use AI-Generated Art in Your Digital Marketing and Content Efforts?

Publicerad

Can You Use AI-Generated Art in Your Digital Marketing and Content Efforts?

By now, you’ve likely tried out one of the new AI-based image generation tools, which ‘sample’ a range of image repository websites and online references to create all new visuals based on text prompts.

DALL·E is the most well-known of these new apps, while Midjourney has also become popular in recent months, enabling users to create some startling visual artworks, with virtually no effort at all.

But what are your usage rights to the visuals you create – and for marketers, can you actually use these images in your content, without potential copyright concerns?

Right now, it seems that you can – though there are some provisos to consider.

Enligt terms of use for DALL·E, users do have the rights to use their creations for any purpose, including commercial usage:

"Subject to your compliance with these terms and our Content Policy, you may use Generations for any legal purpose, including for commercial use. This means you may sell your rights to the Generations you create, incorporate them into works such as books, websites, and presentations, and otherwise commercialize them.

Yes, you can even sell the visuals you create, though most stock photo platforms are now re-assessing whether they’ll actually accept such for sale.

This week, Getty Images became the latest platform to ban the upload and sale of illustrations generated through AI art tools, which, according to Getty, is due to:

“…concerns with respect to the copyright of outputs from these models and unaddressed rights issues with respect to the imagery, the image metadata and those individuals contained within the imagery.”

Part of the concern here is that the visuals that are used as the source material for these AI generated depictions may not be licensed for commercial use.

Though even that’s not necessarily a definitive legal barrier.

Som förklarat av The Verge:

“Software like Stable Diffusion [another AI art tool] is trained on copyrighted images scraped from the web, including personal art blogs, news sites, and stock photo sites like Getty Images. The act of scraping is legal in the US, and it seems the output of the software is covered by “fair use” doctrine. But fair use provides weaker protection to commercial activity like selling pictures, and some artists whose work has been scraped and imitated by companies making AI image generators have called for new laws to regulate this domain.

Indeed, various proposals have been put forward to potentially regulate and even restrict the use of these tools to protect artists, many of whom could well be out of the job as a result. But any such rules are not in place as yet, and it could take years before a legal consensus is established as to how to better protect artists whose work is sourced in the back-end.

There are even questions over the technical process of creation, and how that applies to legal protection in this sense. Back in February, the US Copyright Office effectively implied that AI-generated images can’t be copyrighted at all as an element of ‘human authorship’ is required.

In terms of specific content policies, DALL·E’s usage terms state that people cannot use the app to ‘create, upload, or share images that are not G-rated or that could cause harm’.

So no depictions of violence or hate symbols, while the DALL·E team also encourages users to proactively disclose AI involvement in their content.

DALL·E’s additional guidelines are:

  • Do not upload images of people without their consent.
  • Do not upload images to which you do not hold appropriate usage rights.
  • Do not create images of public figures.

This is where further complications could come in. As noted by JumpStory, users of AI image generation tools should be wary of potential copyright concerns when looking to create images that include real people, as they may end up pulling in pictures of people’s actual faces.

JumpStory notes that many of the source images for the DALL·E project actually come from Flickr, and are subject to Flickr’s terms of use. For most generated depictions, like landscapes and artworks, etc., that’s not a problem, but it is possible that one of these tools could end up using a person’s real face, while re-creations of public figures could also be subject to defamation and misrepresentation, dependent on context.

Again, the legal specifics here are complex, and really, there’s no true precedent to go on, so how such a case might actually be prosecuted is unclear. But if you are looking to generate images of people, there may be complications, if that visual ends up directly resembling an actual person.

Clearly stating that the image is AI-generated will, in most cases, provide some level of clarity. But as a precautionary measure, avoiding clear depictions of people’s faces in your created images could be a safer bet.

MidJourney’s terms also make it clear violations of intellectual property are not acceptable:

“If you knowingly infringe someone else’s intellectual property, and that costs us money, we’re going to come find you and collect that money from you. We might also do other stuff, like try to get a court to make you pay our attorney’s fees. Don’t do it.”

Oddly tough talk for legal documentation, but the impetus is clear – while you can use these tools to create art, creating clearly derivative or IP infringing images could be problematic. User discretion, in this sense, is advised.

But really, that’s where things stand, from a legal perspective – while these systems take elements from other visuals online, the actual image that you’ve created has never existed till you created it, and is therefore not subject to copyright because your prompt is, in effect, the original source.

At some stage, the legal technicalities around such may change – and I do suspect, at some time, somebody will hold an AI art show or similar, or sell a collection of AI-generated art online which depicts significant elements of other artists’ work, and that will spark a new legal debate over what constitutes intellectual property violation in this respect.

But right now, full use of the images created in these tools is largely fine, as per the terms stated in the documentation of the tools themselves.

Note: This is not legal advice, and it’s worth checking with your own legal team to clarify your company’s stance on such before going ahead.



Källlänk

Håll ett öga på vad vi gör
Bli först med att få de senaste uppdateringarna och exklusivt innehåll direkt till din e-postinkorg.
Vi lovar att inte spamma dig. Du kan avbryta prenumerationen när som helst.
Ogiltig e-postadress

SOCIAL

Musk Says That, as of April 15th, Only Tweets from Twitter Blue Subscribers Will be Recommended in the Main Feed

Publicerad

Twitter lanserar test av annonsinriktning baserat specifikt på sökfrågor i appen

With Twitter Blue take-up failing to reach expectations, Elon Musk is taking drastic action to drive more adoption, announcing today that, as of April 15th, the only tweets that will be displayed in the ‘For You’ tab – i.e. the main tab of the app – will be from paying, Twitter Blue verified accounts.

As Musk notes, voting in Twitter polls will also become a Twitter Blue exclusive option, which will severely restrict the reach of non-paying accounts, while also limiting general user functionality.

Twitter’s also removing ‘legacy’ blue checkmarks later this week, which will mean that, as of April 15th, your Twitter feeds are going to look a lot different, with the only blue ticks being from paying users, and only paying users showing up in For You feed recommendations.

You’ll still be able to view tweets from the accounts you follow in your ‘Following’ tab, and you’ll still be able to see tweets from non-Twitter Blue accounts in other areas, like Explore trends. But it will limit visibility, which could prompt more accounts to pay up, and boost Twitter’s revenue intake from subscriptions.

Twitter Blue, which, as of last week, is now available in all regions, currently has around 450k subscribers, which equates to 0.18% of Twitter’s total user base. The risk for Twitter is that this small group of users is also largely aligned with Musk, and his political and ideological stances, which could turn your For You feed into a very one-sided discussion, in relation to political and world events.

That could turn a lot of users away – because as Parler and various other right wing social media apps have shown, nobody really wants to engage in a partisan chatter fest. But brands, in particular, do want visibility for their tweets, and maybe, by restricting their exposure based on subscriptions, that’ll lead to a big uptake in Twitter Blue, which, by extension, as Musk notes, could help to combat bots and spam in the app.

The logic here is that spammers and scammers won’t be able to afford to pay $8 per account to run their schemes. Right now, a scammer can set up hundreds of thousands of Twitter accounts, free of charge, then use those profiles to make certain opinions or angles trend, amplifying whatever side of an argument they choose to take.   

But if the majority of Twitter users pay for verification, that will eventually mean the only non-verified accounts will belong to spammers that can’t afford it. That, theoretically, will make these scams much easier to identify – but in order for this to be a viable approach, Musk will need really high take-up of Twitter Blue, which, thus far, is not even close to happening.

Which is why Twitter’s now taking steps to make paid verification a thing.

Will that work? I’m tipping the majority of users still won’t pay, while the potential downside is that it could make a lot of people less likely to tweet, and less likely to switch over to the ‘For You’ tab, hampering discovery, and thus usage.

But it seems like Musk is going to find out for himself.

At least he’ll know, definitively, if this is a workable option or not.  



Källlänk

Håll ett öga på vad vi gör
Bli först med att få de senaste uppdateringarna och exklusivt innehåll direkt till din e-postinkorg.
Vi lovar att inte spamma dig. Du kan avbryta prenumerationen när som helst.
Ogiltig e-postadress
Fortsätt läsa

SOCIAL

Utah blir den första delstaten som stiftar en lag som begränsar barns användning av sociala medier

Publicerad

Utah blir den första staten som stiftar en lag som begränsar barn' användning av sociala medier

“We’re no longer willing to let social media companies continue to harm the mental health of our youth. Today we signed two key bills in our fight against social media companies into law.”
Source – Utah Gov. Spencer J. Cox

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox signed a pair of measures Thursday that requires parental consent before kids can access social media sites.

The two bills the Republican governor signed into law also prohibit kids under 18 from using social media between the hours of 10:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m., require age verification for anyone who wants to use social media in the state, and seek to prevent tech companies from luring kids to their apps using addictive features.

The measures also require companies to give a parent or guardian access to their child’s social media accounts. Adults will also have to confirm their ages to use social media platforms or they’ll lose account access.

Enligt Associated Press, the measures also open the door to lawsuits on behalf of children claiming social media harmed them. A number of tech companies are expected to sue before the laws take effect in March 2024.

“Youth rates of depression and other mental health issues are on the rise because of social media companies,” Cox said in a tweet Thursday. “As leaders and parents, we have a responsibility to protect our young people.”

Tech giants like Facebook and Google have enjoyed unbridled growth for over a decade, amid concerns over user privacy, hate speech, misinformation, and harmful effects on teens’ mental health.

Lawmakers have made Big Tech attacks a rallying cry on the campaign trail and begun trying to rein them in once in office. Utah’s law was signed on the same day TikTok’s CEO testified before Congress about, among other things, the platform’s effects on teenagers’ mental health.

And while legislation has stalled on the federal level at reining in tech companies, Utah is not the only state stepping up to deal with the problem. Lawmakers in red states including Arkansas, Texas, Ohio, and Louisiana, and blue states including New Jersey are advancing similar proposals.

The flip side of the coin

Ari Cohn, a free speech lawyer for TechFreedom said last week that the then-bills “violate the First Amendment and threaten to fragment the Internet.”

He argued that the governor shouldn’t sign bills that force social media users to provide ID showing their age and, for minors, parental consent.

Jim Steyer, the CEO, and founder of Common Sense, a nonprofit advocacy group focusing on kids and technology, hailed the law aimed at reining in social media’s addictive features.

But Steyer said the other bill Cox signed giving parents access to children’s social media posts would “deprive kids of the online privacy protections we advocate for, a violation of their First Amendment rights.

The law also requires age verification and parental consent for minors to create a social media account, which doesn’t get to the root of the problem, said Steyer. “Kids and teens will still be exposed to companies’ harmful data collection and design practices once they are on the platform.”

Tech industry lobbyists quickly decried the laws as unconstitutional, saying they infringe on people’s right to exercise the First Amendment online.

“Utah will soon require online services to collect sensitive information about teens and families, not only to verify ages but to verify parental relationships, like government-issued IDs and birth certificates, putting their private data at risk of breach,” said Nicole Saad Bembridge, an associate director at NetChoice, a tech lobby group.



Källlänk

Håll ett öga på vad vi gör
Bli först med att få de senaste uppdateringarna och exklusivt innehåll direkt till din e-postinkorg.
Vi lovar att inte spamma dig. Du kan avbryta prenumerationen när som helst.
Ogiltig e-postadress
Fortsätt läsa

SOCIAL

Snap anställer regionala presidenter, inklusive Rob Wilk som president för Amerika 2023-03-28

Publicerad

Snap anställer regionala presidenter, inklusive Rob Wilk som president för Amerika 2023-03-28

Snap Inc. –– parent company
of social platform Snapchat –– has announced Microsoft ad-veteran Rob Wilk as the company’s first-ever President of Americas, marking its most recent addition in a series of regional
hires in the advertising and monetization space.

Wilk spent the past eight years at Microsoft where he …



Källlänk

Håll ett öga på vad vi gör
Bli först med att få de senaste uppdateringarna och exklusivt innehåll direkt till din e-postinkorg.
Vi lovar att inte spamma dig. Du kan avbryta prenumerationen när som helst.
Ogiltig e-postadress
Fortsätt läsa

Trendigt

sv_SESvenska