You must log in or register to comment.
This reminds me of the Free Law Project, where there’s a large network of people that upload court documents for anything that they’ve paid for initial access to.
“I did it for 100% free”.
5 minutes later…
“Hosting is not cheap and I only have fraction of the library big companies have. Donate to support this project”.
Looks like a cool project but if significant number of people started using this he would have to start charging his users. He’s creating a website that one day could compete with getty, not killed their business model.
Sure, everything costs effort and money. But not $400 per image download like what some commercial sites want to charge.
TIL selling a license to public domain footage you don’t own is legal…
same with MIT licensed software iirc
deleted by creator
Thank you so much! I was searching for something like this just a couple of days ago.
Lol, both other commenters (at this time) didn’t bother to watch the video before having an opinion. The guy downloaded a bunch of public domain footage and made it searchable and free to download. Getty was charging $400/clip for what should be and now is free.
Nobody attacks human creativity quite like an anti-AI crusader.
There are plenty of reasons to be against the AI industry right now, but some people insist on going scorched earth against others every time they even suspect AI usage, and they have transphobe-level accuracy identifying what they don’t like.
The AI shills don’t care at all when they are called out, but actual artists and other creatives are forced to performatively prove that they didn’t use AI, and never get apologies for the false accusations even after proving their artistic purity, because the scolds think their harassment is heroic.
Lemmy has a disproportionate number of these stupid people, and I am tired of seeing every discussion on this site derailed by their angst.
There’s two comments mentioning AI, and people happily and cordially correcting them. What the fuck are you on about?
You are the only angst comment here, calling people stupid.
Did you do it with “AI”? Because that’s another business model you might want to not support.
No, I’m not watching your Youtube video because business models.
No, it’s not even a business that they’re doing and there’s no mention of AI.
Why bother with your unnecessary comment about something you didn’t even bother to look into? It’s not a good contribution to the discussion.
I’m pretty sure OP is not the one that made the video.
There is no mention of AI in the video at all.
TLDW: The creator made a search engine for public domain clips that is free (as in money free), since he was annoyed with stock footage providers charging money for them.
~~This isn’t a business model, you just used an img2img model and had the prompt day “remove the watermark”. Those who make models and run the apis have a business. You (or the creator of this) do not. ~~
That’s not what he did at all. Way to not watch the video before spewing an uninformed opinion. He indexed a bunch of public domain video and made it searchable and free instead of $400/clip like getty was charging.
You’re right, I didn’t. Retracted.
That’s literally nothing like what was done here. Did you even watch the video before commenting?
There is no img2img model, there is no watermark removal, or anything like that.Did you not see where I striked it through and the other comment already calling that out, and wherein already admitted my mistake?
Your strikethrough didn’t work, for whatever reason. It just looks like ~~ feisty punctuation ~~
