Last fall, software company Adobe Inc. embarked on a somewhat unusual project. The firm commissioned select photographers from its network of professionals to capture a set of highly specific images. The requests ranged from taking 1,000 photos of bananas for $60, to capturing intimate close-ups of mouths in the act of chewing food for $80. One commission sought a minimum of 500 JPEG images of a wide range of dog and cat breeds.
What Adobe referred to as “missions” were not simply whimsical projects or the company’s response to a sudden demand for certain types of images. Rather, they were necessary raw material for a much bigger undertaking. Adobe’s requirement for what may seem like very specific image sets has raised questions in the industry, piquing the curiosity of professionals and competitors alike. Questions arise regarding Adobe’s ultimate goals and strategies within the AI space and beyond.
According to a description, Adobe’s actions seem to be directed towards the development of Firefly, a suite of AI tools that aim to rival the likes of Dall-E and Midjourney. It raises an interesting debate: will creatives, who form a significant segment of Adobe’s user base, embrace these innovations? Are we on the brink of witnessing a showdown in the world of OpenAI?
As Adobe makes moves to gather the necessary raw material for Firefly, we, as legal professionals, are eagerly following up on this development. Not only for the potential implications on creative copyrights and intellectual property, but what this signifies for the intersection of AI and law.
For more information on this ongoing development and the broader implications for the legal field, click here for the full report by Austin Carr and Brody Ford.