Well it's in the terms that you may not do any of that, but of course there are always bad actors out there.
Wouldn't someone have that issue with a regular logo as well? Wouldn't the same recourse be followed?
Wouldn't someone have that issue with a regular logo as well? Wouldn't the same recourse be followed?
Isn't the usual workflow "pay me and I'll make a logo for you", not "here's a bunch of premade logos for sale"?
Is not the selection and omission of poorly generated images the "human authorship" [1] necessary to qualify? Or can OP modify AI generated art meaningfully to qualify for copyright?
[1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/us-copyright-offic...
It reminds me of 3D art where there is a lot of up front work in making models, textures, armatures, and shaders. You send a ton of data to the GPU and it spits out a rendered image or more likely a tile of one. Sending a vector of bones does not seem much different then sending a vector of a prompt.