Adobe is an obnoxious company that does a lot of bad things, but it's weird to me seeing them cast in a negative light like this for their approach to model training copyright. As far as I know they were the first to have a genAI product that was trained exclusively on data that they had rights to under existing copyright law, rather than relying on a free use argument or just hoping the law would change around them. Out of all the companies who've built AI tooling they're the last one I'd expect to see dragged out as an example of copyright misbehavior.

I was surprised, too: I thought Adobe's main problem was their abusive pricing, and I was actually a little impressed by their take on this hype wave. And yet. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40607442

I can see how that checks the box of "policing", but you also made this claim:

> in order to grab content that is not theirs to train models they resell back to the people they stole content from

Did you not mean that to imply that Adobe is using images from customers to train generative AI? Because that's sure what it sounds like.