open for commissions~ ♡

[starrypuff]

For cover art ~ 25$
For Character Design ~ 15$
I'm new here so i dont know how much should i charge here but these days im free so i wanna help out yall

 

[bab66]

Bro is really selling AI art commissions

 

[SailusGebel]

 

[ManwX]

Umm. So this is Ai art.. I mean can't anyone just do that with stable diffusion? Leonardo etc... hmm..

 

[Zinless]

 

[Paul_Tromba]

I don't think you can legally charge money for AI generated art since AI art is considered to be owned by the AI creators and is part of a non-copyright legal agreement since the monkey photo fiasco. I may be wrong though. I hope you do well otherwise.

 

[Sleds]

I don't think you can legally charge money for AI generated art since AI art is considered to be owned by the AI creators and is part of a non-copyright legal agreement since the monkey photo fiasco.

There no copyright on AI, you can sell them but anybody can steal them and you can't do a thing about it.

 

[Paul_Tromba]

There no copyright on AI, you can sell them but anybody can steal them and you can't do a thing about it.

I thought there was a precedent set after the whole monkey photo fiasco as the copyright owner is the AI and would thus, have to be paid in order for it to be legally sold? I could be wrong but I could have sworn that selling AI art was illegal (at least in America and Europe).

 

[Zinless]

I thought there was a precedent set after the whole monkey photo fiasco as the copyright owner is the AI and would this, have to be paid in order for it to be legally sold? I could be wrong but AI could have sworn that selling AI art was illegal (at least in America and Europe).

I think when people charge for AI art, they're not charging for the art itself, they're charging for the fee of generating it.

I think what's illegal is claiming you own AI art and/or using it in a commercial product.

 

[Paul_Tromba]

I think when people charge for AI art, they're not charging for the art itself, they're charging for the fee of generating it.

I think what's illegal is claiming you own AI art and/or using it in a commercial product.

I see. That makes sense.

 

[Sleds]

I thought there was a precedent set after the whole monkey photo fiasco as the copyright owner is the AI and would thus, have to be paid in order for it to be legally sold? I could be wrong but I could have sworn that selling AI art was illegal (at least in America and Europe).

It depend which AI you use, some said that every image generated are owned by the AI creator but some like nijijourney said that no one own the image but if you don't pay for it, all the image you generate are public and then the propriety of everyone.

 

[RepresentingEnvy]

I thought there was a precedent set after the whole monkey photo fiasco as the copyright owner is the AI and would thus, have to be paid in order for it to be legally sold? I could be wrong but I could have sworn that selling AI art was illegal (at least in America and Europe).

I think when people charge for AI art, they're not charging for the art itself, they're charging for the fee of generating it.

I think what's illegal is claiming you own AI art and/or using it in a commercial product.

There is no legal obstacle to selling AI art. People are literally doing it all the time on deviant art, and the site even promotes it.

 

[Sleds]

There is no legal obstacle to selling AI art. People are literally doing it all the time on deviant art, and the site even promotes it.

Yes, it's just sad to pay 20$ for a single image generated by AI when you can pay 20$ for unlimited generation on niji and made whatever you want. And I don't even talk of the other AI which are free.

 

[Zinless]

There is no legal obstacle to selling AI art. People are literally doing it all the time on deviant art, and the site even promotes it.

Yes, but they're not selling the art itself, they're selling the service of generating it and sending the result to you. Using the AI art you that you bought from someone (ie. Deviantart) in a commercial product would still bring some legal problems.

Example: Steam won't publish your game if it has AI art generated content in the files.

 

[SailusGebel]

Finally! SH peeps started cooking.

 

[Paul_Tromba]

Finally! SH peeps started cooking.

You know SHF. Lots of drama.

Yes, but they're not selling the art itself, they're selling the service of generating it and sending the result to you. Using the AI art you bought in a commercial product would still bring some legal problems.

Example: Steam won't publish your game if it has AI art generated content in the files.

That is a huge problem that I thought had more legal problems than there actually are.

 

[SailusGebel]

You know SHF. Lots of drama.

 

[RepresentingEnvy]

Yes, but they're not selling the art itself, they're selling the service of generating it and sending the result to you. Using the AI art you that you bought from someone (ie. Deviantart) in a commercial product would still bring some legal problems.

Example: Steam won't publish your game if it has AI art generated content in the files.

Is it actually illegal, or do those publishers just make it against their policy? I am just asking for clarification.

 

[SailusGebel]

Is it actually illegal, or do those publishers just make it against their policy? I am just asking for clarification.

 

[Zinless]

Is it actually illegal, or do those publishers just make it against their policy? I am just asking for clarification.

If you can prove that everything used in the AI model to generate the image was owned by you, it might be legal to use. But proving so is hard. Also, if you bought it from Deviantart, .

Here's some excerpt from an article talking about the steam game that was banned temporarily for having AI generated content in the files.

“As the legal ownership of such AI-generated art is unclear, we cannot ship your game while it contains these AI-generated assets, unless you can affirmatively confirm that you own the rights to all of the IP used in the data set that trained the AI to create the assets in your game,” their first warning letter stated.

“we reviewed [Game Name Here] and took our time to better understand the AI tech used to create it. Again, while we strive to ship most titles submitted to us, we cannot ship games for which the developer does not have all of the necessary rights. At this time, we are declining to distribute your game since it’s unclear if the underlying AI tech used to create the assets has sufficient rights to the training data.”

Considering most AI tools can’t really claim to have legal rights to all their training data (and even if they do, it may still not be an ethical use of that data), this policy as stated basically amounts to a blanket ban on AI-generated assets in games.