AI assets are a legal risk and need to be banned from the marketplace
forums.unrealengine.com
forums.unrealengine.com
And the information about Steam banning AI is outdated, it is allowed as of the updated policy here: https://store.steampowered.com/news/group/4145017/view/38624...
'If a work’s traditional elements of authorship were produced by a machine, the work lacks human authorship and the Office will not register it 26 For example, when an AI technology receives solely a prompt 27 from a human and produces complex written, visual, or musical works in response, the “traditional elements of authorship” are determined and executed by the technology—not the human user. Based on the Office’s understanding of the generative AI technologies currently available, users do not exercise ultimate creative control over how such systems interpret prompts and generate material.'
https://copyright.gov/ai/ai_policy_guidance.pdf
There is some nuance to the document, but prompt-only works seem pretty clear.
A person still owns that "something", that's the big difference, the legal system is claiming that no one owns AI generated images, that's the whole point.
As far as licensing those assets and whether or not they can be included in game made for sale - I feel that still hasn't been fully ironed out. AI art isn't going away. We're still shaping the ways they can be used and licensed. They will probably find their way into every major game and title in the future, so some kind of structure needs to be created to allow or deny it.
I wonder if we'll see "100% human made content" type tags/logos in the future, and if those products will command a higher price.
Also, the creators presumably never specifically agreed to have their content used as AI training data and might rather object to that because then they have to compete with the AI generated content going forward. Which is the thing the creators don't want -- it isn't going to do them any more good just because they got a past payment which they'd have gotten regardless.
What they want is for AI generated art to not exist, but that isn't going to happen. Given that, it doesn't do them any good to legitimize Getty or Adobe but not Midjourney etc.
I expect this is coming. Like seeing Certified Humane, Cage-Free, or Official League Merchandise stickers but on games, movies, art exhibitions, concerts. You can get 100% Made by Humans® verified products, which will add to the novelty of the experience.
But you'd have to verify the supply chain of all the assets which is almost impossible to do even with physical products. It's also somewhat sad that even prior to todays AI authenticity was lacking in almost everything, human interactions, knock-offs, experiences (travel), news sources, and it will (probably) get even worse.
Or maybe better if someone can pull this off well, anyone aware of anyone working on this currently?
And yeah, it's not fully settled, but it could break at any time to "all AI assets are public domain".
Big gamble to build on those.
[1] Computer generated “art” is spam.
The signal to noise ratio is what would ruin things IMO. There is a much higher risk when I can easily generate 1k models of a carpenter ant in a day.