Social media users have discovered a controversial case for Google’s new Gemini AI model: removal of images watercolors, including images published by Getty Images and other known media accessories.
Last week, Google extended access to the ability to create images of Gemini 2.0 flash, which allows the model to produce and process the image content. Is a one strong abilityby all accounts. It also seems to have few protective messages. Gemini 2.0 Flash will create unexpected images depicts celebrities and Copyright -protected charactersAnd – as mentioned earlier – remove watercolors from existing photos.
New Skill Unlocked: The Gemini 2 Flash model is really awesome in removing watercolors in the pictures! pic.twitter.com/6qik0flfcv
– Deedy (@deedydas) March 15 2025
Like enough x and Red Users marked, Gemini 2.0 Flash will not only remove watercolors, but will also try to fill in any gaps created by deleting the watermark. Other tools that work with AI do this too, but the Gemini 2.0 Flash seems to be extremely specialized in self-and free to use it.
Gemini 2.0 Flash, available in Google’s AI studio, is amazing to edit images with simple text prompts.
It can also remove watercolors from images (and puts its own fine watermark in instead of 🤣) pic.twitter.com/znhtqjst1z
– Tanay Jaipuria (@tanayj) March 16 2025
To be clear, the ability to create Gemini 2.0 Flash images is characterized as “experimental” and “not for production use” at the moment and is only available in the tools facing Google developers such as AI Studio. The model is also not a perfect watermark removal. The Flash of Gemini 2.0 appears to be struggling with some translucent watercolors and watercolors that canvas large sections of images.
Still, some copyright holders will certainly face the lack of restrictions on the use of Gemini 2.0 flash. Some models, including the Claude 3.7 Sonnet of Anthropic and Openai’s GPT-4O, explicitly refuse to remove watercolors. Claude calls that removing a watermark from a “unethical and possibly illegal” image.
The abolition of a watermark without the consent of the original owner is considered illegal in accordance with copyright law (according to law firms like this; Out of rare exceptions.
Google did not immediately respond to a request for comments sent outside of normal operating hours.
Updated 3/17 at 1:48 PM Pacific: A Google Representative provided the following statement:
“Using Google’s AI genetic tools to participate in copyright violations are a violation of the terms of service. As with all experimental liberation, we are closely monitoring and listening to developer feedback.”
