Adobe Creates Symbol To Encourage Tagging AI-Generated Content 25
Emilia David reports via The Verge: Adobe and other companies have established a symbol that can be attached to content alongside metadata, establishing its provenance, including whether it was made with AI tools. The symbol, which Adobe calls an "icon of transparency," can be added via Adobe's photo and video editing platforms like Photoshop or Premiere and eventually Microsoft's Bing Image Generator. It will be added to the metadata of images, videos, and PDFs to announce who owns and created the data. When viewers look at a photo online, they can hover over the mark, and it will open a dropdown that includes information about its ownership, the AI tool used to make it, and other details about the media's production.
Adobe developed the symbol with other companies as part of the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA), a group that looks to create technical standards to certify the source and provenance of content. (It uses the initials "CR," which confusingly stands for content CRedentials, to avoid being confused with the icon for Creative Commons.) Other members of the C2PA include Arm, Intel, Microsoft, and Truepic. C2PA owns the trademark for the symbol. Andy Parsons, senior director of Adobe's Content Authenticity Initiative, tells The Verge that the symbol acts as a "nutrition label" of sorts, telling people the provenance of the media. The presence of the symbol is meant to encourage the tagging of AI-generated data, as Parsons said it creates more transparency into how content was created. While the small symbol is visible in the image, the information and the symbol are also embedded in the metadata, so it will not be Photoshopped out.
Adobe developed the symbol with other companies as part of the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA), a group that looks to create technical standards to certify the source and provenance of content. (It uses the initials "CR," which confusingly stands for content CRedentials, to avoid being confused with the icon for Creative Commons.) Other members of the C2PA include Arm, Intel, Microsoft, and Truepic. C2PA owns the trademark for the symbol. Andy Parsons, senior director of Adobe's Content Authenticity Initiative, tells The Verge that the symbol acts as a "nutrition label" of sorts, telling people the provenance of the media. The presence of the symbol is meant to encourage the tagging of AI-generated data, as Parsons said it creates more transparency into how content was created. While the small symbol is visible in the image, the information and the symbol are also embedded in the metadata, so it will not be Photoshopped out.
Talk about obfuscating things (Score:4, Insightful)
If a graphic designer would ever take credit for this, they should be ashamed of themselves. Then again, they probably just paid someone on fiverr.
How about a little robot with the letters AI across the face? I mean i'm no designer but that would be more to the point.
Re: (Score:3)
How about "AI" instead of "CR" anyway? Looks *way* too similar to Creative Commons (which is confused with Closed Captioning in video sometimes, at least by me, ironically).
Re: (Score:2)
Content producers pay for their software and want to reduce their workload but don't want to get sued for fraud, so they are trying to pretend they're not lying by using this symbol instead of 'AI'.
Probably a court will be persuaded. In court they demand "the whole truth" but on trial they will accept any plausible excuse with a tenuous throughline - "not 100% lying" somehow becomes the standard.
No wonder normal people are completely fed up with this system.
Re: (Score:2)
Pay?
They probably used AI for it.
Re: (Score:2)
This sort of comment is just ignorant.
Raw AI generations are fine for meme-quality stuff, but simply insufficient for any sort of serious artistic or professional work. To get things to professional takes significant amount of human, manual work. Calling that human work irrelevant just because there was also AI work used is just dumb.
I fully support (optional) metadata to describe workflows. For *all* works. And I specify "workflows", because there's a long chain of steps involved in making any serious w
Re: (Score:2)
Not that I particularly said anything you attributed to me, but you're basically admitting that identifying ML or AI as even part of the product taints the entire product.
That's an interesting viewpoint and one that will only change by attributing quality to something ML was involved in doing, rather than obfuscation.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, exactly, I said precisely that, right next to the part where how I talked about all velociraptors should learn to juggle onions.
Dude it's a mega corporations (Score:3)
NO AI (Score:2, Troll)
There's already that "NO AI" sign that was once all over Artstation. I think that's become the de-facto symbol for AI art.
Re: (Score:2)
I love that thing. AI artists had endless fun using AI to remix it ;)
The fact that people thought that symbol would "pollute AI training datasets and render AI image generators useless" just screams how ignorant they are of the process. My favourite part was when AI artists started making AI images where they faked having it been corrupted by the "NO AI" images, and anti-AI people started sharing them, believing them to be totally legit proof that their campaign was working (just weeks after it began).
The
what CR really stands for (Score:2)
If they are going to brand it as AI (Score:2)
Adobe Eh? (Score:2)
Since it's from Adobe, what's the license fee - $5.99 per month or one easy annual fee of $71.88 (per user/workstation of course).
excuse me, 'owner?' (Score:2)
The US copyright office has formally ruled that AI generated images cannot be copyrighted, so "what exactly" is implied by "owner" here?
Owner of what? Because it sure as fuck isn't a copyright.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember NFT ownership?
Yeah...
Re:excuse me, 'owner?' (Score:4, Informative)
The actual ruling is that raw images cannot be copyrighted where there is no control over the positioning and form of the elements, but that copyright can be extended where there is significant selection or manual postprocessing work on the outputs.
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of AI images, if you create such an image, technically you "own" it, but you can't copyright it, i.e., you can't de
Adobe already has an Al symbol (Score:5, Funny)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Why not use that one?
Ownership of genAI media? (Score:1)
BS (Score:3)
While the small symbol is visible in the image, the information and the symbol are also embedded in the metadata, so it will not be Photoshopped out.
If you save without metadata, it will be photoshopped out from there too
Re: BS (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is tha tmost social media sites strip all metadata.
IMHO, they need to stop doing that. There's some data that should be stripped (based on user preferences) for privacy reasons, but not all.
Gonna be as useful as the Evil Bit (Score:2)
Because if someone creates something with AI, he sure as all hell wouldn't want to pretend it's been done without. There ain't no drawback to creating an image with the aid of AI, after all...
Next Week's headlines... (Score:2)
Yes of Course (Score:1)
This content is good. That content is bad. Oh, and we can turn your software off.
Can't imagine where that's headed.