7 ms·

I'm blown away by this: "Starting today, users get full usage rights to commercialize the images they create with DALL·E, including the right to reprint, sell,

I'm blown away by this: "Starting today, users get full usage rights to commercialize the images they create with DALL·E, including the right to reprint, sell, and merchandise. This includes images they generated during the research preview." I assumed this was going to be the sticking point for wider usage for a long time. They're now saying that you have full rights to sell Dall-E 2 creations?

minimaxir 4y ago
Previously, OpenAI asserted they owned the generated images, so the new licensing is a shift in that aspect. GPT-3 also has a "you own the content" clause as well. Of course, that clause won't deter a third party from filing a lawsuit against you if you commercialize a generated image too close to something realistic, as the copyrights of AI generated content still hasn't been legally tested.
- pornel 4y ago
  AFAIK only people can own copyright (the monkey selfie case tested this), and machine-generated outputs don't count as creative work (you can't write an algorithm that generates every permutation of notes and claim you own every song[1]), so DALL-E-generated images are most likely copyright-free. I presume OpenAI only relies on terms of service to dictate what users are allowed to do, but they can't own the images, and neither can their users. [1]: https://felixreda.eu/2021/07/github-copilot-is-not-infringing-your-copyright/ https://felixreda.eu/2021/07/github-copilot-is-not-infringin...
  - TaylorAlexander 4y ago
    The monkey selfie was not derived from millions of existing works, and that is the difference. If an artist has a well-known art style, and this algorithm was trained on it and can copy that style, would the artist have grounds to sue? I don't know.
    - ZetaZero 4y ago
      > If an artist has a well-known art style, and this algorithm was trained on it and can copy that style... A lawyer could argue that the algorithm is producing a derivative work of the copyrighted input.
      - TaylorAlexander 4y ago
        Right but if that work isn’t significantly changed from the source, it could be ruled as infringement. DALL-E cannot tell the users (afaik) if a result is close to any source material.
    - Melting_Harps 4y ago
      > If an artist has a well-known art style, and this algorithm was trained on it and can copy that style, would the artist have grounds to sue? I don't know. While nothing has been commercialized yet on the DALLE2 subreddit, I know that it can do Dave Choe's work remarkably well. I also saw Alex Gray's work to be close, but not really identical either. It wasn't as intricate as his work is. It will be interesting if this takes off and you have a sort of Banksy effect take over where unless it's a physical piece of art it doesn't have much value and is only made all the better because of some sort polemic attached to it, eg Girl with balloon.
      - lancesells 4y ago
        I'm going to guess there's not going to be much value placed on anything out of DALLE for a long while. Digital art is typically worth much less than physical art and I would say these GAN images are going to worth less than digital art generated by human hand. There will be outliers of course but I would be shocked if there's much of a market in it for at least the present.
        napier 4y ago
        When these tools can generate layered tiff/psd images, polygon meshes and automate UV packing; then we’ll be talking.
  - fanzhang 4y ago
    If this were a concern, a user can easily bypass this by having a work-for-hire person add a minor transform layer on top of the DALL-E generated images right?
    - JacobThreeThree 4y ago
      Wouldn't it have to meet the threshold of being a "transformative" work? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformative_use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformative_use
  - leereeves 4y ago
    > DALL-E-generated images are most likely copyright-free The US Copyright Office did make a ruling that might suggest that recently[1], but crucially, in that case, the AI "didn't include an element of human authorship." The board might rule differently about DALL-E because the prompts do provide an opportunity for human creativity. And there's another important caveat that the felixreda.eu link seems to miss. DALL-E output, whether or not it's protected by copyright, can certainly infringe other copyrights, just like the output of any other mechanical process. In short, Disney can still sue if you distribute DALL-E generated images of Marvel characters. 1: https://www.theverge.com/2022/2/21/22944335/us-copyright-office-reject-ai-generated-art-recent-entrance-to-paradise https://www.theverge.com/2022/2/21/22944335/us-copyright-off...
  - unnah 4y ago
    DALL-E can generate recognizable pictures of Homer Simpson, Batman and other commercial properties. Such images could easily be considered derivative works of the original copyrighted images that were used as training input. I'm sure there are plenty of corporate IP lawyers ready to argue the point at court.
    - numpad0 4y ago
      I'm kind of surprised that no one had found "verbatim copy" cases as were made with GitHub Copilot. Such exact copies in photography are likely easier to go for than with code snippets.
      - Nition 4y ago
        It might be interesting to find an image in the training set with a long, very unique description, and try that exact same description as input in DALL·E 2. Of course it's unlikely to produce the exact same image, or if it does, you've also discovered an incredible image compression algorithm.
        numpad0 4y ago
        Oh I don’t have problems with DALL-E doing its thing, I just think it’s wrong if the purpose will be to cleanse off copyrights from images.
  - totetsu 4y ago
    Can I infringe another Dalle users rights if I take an image generated by their acount and sell prints of it..?
- mensetmanusman 4y ago
  Image generating artificial intelligence is very analogous to a camera. Both technologies have billions of dollars of R&D and tens of thousands of engineers behind supply chains necessary to create the button that a user has the press.
  - minimaxir 4y ago
    There have been decades of litigation around when/where/of whom you can take a photo. AI generated art isn't there.
- LegitShady 4y ago
  As far as I can tell they still own the images they just license your use of them commercially.
- obert 4y ago
  they still own the generated content, only grant usage. I have mixed feelings about this confused approach, it won’t last long. > …you own your Prompts and Uploads, and you agree that OpenAI owns all Generations…
berberous 4y ago
I think they are reacting to competition. MidJourney is amazing, was easier to get into, gives you commercial rights, and frankly I found more fun to use and even better output in most instances.
- pitzips 4y ago
  Midjourney recently changed their terms of service and now the creators own the image and give a license back to Midjourney. Pretty cool.
- davedx 4y ago
  MidJourney seems a little less all-out commercial. The way everyone’s creations are in giant open Discord channels is great too
  - hiidrew 4y ago
    It's an interesting set-up. Viewing other's images and seeing their exact prompts is just as entertaining as generating your own.
- MatthiasPortzel 4y ago
  MidJourney definitely struggles more with complex prompts from what I saw. If you like the output more, that’s subjective, but I think DALL•E is the leader in the space by a wide margin.
  - berberous 4y ago
    I think both have strengths and weaknesses, but I don’t disagree DALL-E in most instances is technically better at matching prompts. But I often enjoyed, artistically, the results of MidJourney more; it just felt fun to use and explore.
- stoicjumbotron 4y ago
  Really hope I get an invite for MidJourney soon. Been on the waitlist since March :(
rvz 4y ago
It also means there will possibly be another renaissance of fully automated, mass generated NFTs and tons of derivatives and remixes flooding the NFT market in an attempt to pump the NFT hype again. It doesn't matter, OpenAI wins anyway as these companies will pour hundreds of thousands into generated images. It seems that the NFT grift is about to be rebooted again, such that it isn't going to die that quickly. But still, eventually 90% of these JPEG NFTs will die anyway.
- WalterSear 4y ago
  NFTs were never limited by artwork availability - they are limited by wash-trading ability.
  - rvz 4y ago
    These high photorealistic images can be generated on a mass-scale, completely automated without a human which ultimately cuts the need for an artist to do that. They will be replaced by DALL·E 2 for creating these illustrations, book covers, NFT variants, etc opening up the whole arena to anyone to do this themselves. All it takes is to describe what they want in text and less than a minute, the work is delivered as little as $15. OpenAI still wins either way. If a crypto company goes to using DALL·E 2 to generate photorealistic NFTs, they won't stop them and they will take the money.
    - WalterSear 4y ago
      I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. Art is already dirt cheap. People aren't buying NFTs for their content. This doesn't make it appreciably easier to con rubes.
- Shorel 4y ago
  A massive increase in the offer will mean the price of these NFTs will tend towards zero.
nutanc 4y ago
And I just used it to create cover art for a book published in Amazon :) https://twitter.com/nutanc/status/1549798460290764801?s=20&t=96UzbkzmLhu5v5o8SHgPJQ https://twitter.com/nutanc/status/1549798460290764801?s=20&t...
- pqdbr 4y ago
  What was your prompt?
  - nutanc 4y ago
    "girl with a cap standing next to a shadow man having a speech bubble, digital art"
pferdone 4y ago
Does DALL-E create different outputs for the same input? How does ownership work there?
- flatiron 4y ago
  yes it will. it'll keep on augmenting the image until it recognizes it as the input
- minimaxir 4y ago
  Not only that, but you can also upload an image (that doesn't depict a real person) and generate variations of it without providing a prompt.
Melting_Harps 4y ago
> "Starting today, users get full usage rights to commercialize the images they create with DALL·E, including the right to reprint, sell, and merchandise. This includes images they generated during the research preview." >> And I just used it to create cover art for a book published in Amazon :) Man... what a missed opportunity for Altman... he could have had a really good cryptocurrency/token with a healthy ecosystem and a creative based community if he didn't push this Worldcoin biometric harvesting BS had he just waited for this to release and coupled it with access to GPT. This is the kind of thing that Web3 (a joke) was pushing for all along: revolutionary tech that the everyday person can understand with it's own token based ecosystem for access with full creative rights from the prompts. I wonder if he stepped down from Open AI and put it in a figurehead as CEO could this still work? > Why is using a token better than using money, in this case? It would be better for OpenAI if it can monetize not just its subscription based model via a token to pay for overhead and for further R/D but also for it's ability to issue tokens it can freely exchange for utility on it's platform for exclusive access outside of it's capped $15 model and allow for pay as you go models for those who don't have access to it like myself as it's limited to 1 million users. I don't want an account, and I think that type of gatekeeping wasn't cool during the gmail days either and I had early access back then too, but I'd still personally buy $100s of dollars worth of prompts right now since I think it is fascinating use of NLP and I'm just one of many missed opportunities and represent a lost userbase who just want access for specific projects. By doing this they can still retain the caps of useage on their platform and expand and contract them as they see fit without excluding others. This in turn could justify the continual investment from the VC World into these projects (under the guise of web3) and allow them to scale into viable businesses and further expand the use of AI/ML into other creative spaces, which as a person studying AI and ML and a background in BTC, is what we all wanted to see instead of these aimless bubbles in things like Solana or yield farming via fake DeFi projects like Calesius that we've seen. It would legitimize the use of a token for use of an ecosystem model outside of BTC, which to be honest doesn't really exist and has still a tarnished view with all these failed projects, while gaining reception amongst a greater audience since it's captivated so many since it's release.
- pliny 4y ago
  Why is using a token better than using money, in this case?
mensetmanusman 4y ago
They will benefit by getting additional feedback on which output images are most useful.
- minimaxir 4y ago
  DALL-E 2 has a "Save" feature which is likely a data gathering mechanism for this use case.
bilsbie 4y ago
Every tech should do this. Could google maps silently change your designation to a minority owned alternative?
vlunkr 4y ago
Is the lesson here that these images are worth nothing so they lose nothing by giving them away?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

minimaxir 4y ago

Previously, OpenAI asserted they owned the generated images, so the new licensing is a shift in that aspect. GPT-3 also has a "you own the content" clause as well. Of course, that clause won't deter a third party from filing a lawsuit against you if you commercialize a generated image too close to something realistic, as the copyrights of AI generated content still hasn't been legally tested.

pornel 4y ago
AFAIK only people can own copyright (the monkey selfie case tested this), and machine-generated outputs don't count as creative work (you can't write an algorithm that generates every permutation of notes and claim you own every song[1]), so DALL-E-generated images are most likely copyright-free. I presume OpenAI only relies on terms of service to dictate what users are allowed to do, but they can't own the images, and neither can their users. [1]: https://felixreda.eu/2021/07/github-copilot-is-not-infringing-your-copyright/ https://felixreda.eu/2021/07/github-copilot-is-not-infringin...
- TaylorAlexander 4y ago
  The monkey selfie was not derived from millions of existing works, and that is the difference. If an artist has a well-known art style, and this algorithm was trained on it and can copy that style, would the artist have grounds to sue? I don't know.
  - ZetaZero 4y ago
    > If an artist has a well-known art style, and this algorithm was trained on it and can copy that style... A lawyer could argue that the algorithm is producing a derivative work of the copyrighted input.
    - TaylorAlexander 4y ago
      Right but if that work isn’t significantly changed from the source, it could be ruled as infringement. DALL-E cannot tell the users (afaik) if a result is close to any source material.
  - Melting_Harps 4y ago
    > If an artist has a well-known art style, and this algorithm was trained on it and can copy that style, would the artist have grounds to sue? I don't know. While nothing has been commercialized yet on the DALLE2 subreddit, I know that it can do Dave Choe's work remarkably well. I also saw Alex Gray's work to be close, but not really identical either. It wasn't as intricate as his work is. It will be interesting if this takes off and you have a sort of Banksy effect take over where unless it's a physical piece of art it doesn't have much value and is only made all the better because of some sort polemic attached to it, eg Girl with balloon.
    - lancesells 4y ago
      I'm going to guess there's not going to be much value placed on anything out of DALLE for a long while. Digital art is typically worth much less than physical art and I would say these GAN images are going to worth less than digital art generated by human hand. There will be outliers of course but I would be shocked if there's much of a market in it for at least the present.
      - napier 4y ago
        When these tools can generate layered tiff/psd images, polygon meshes and automate UV packing; then we’ll be talking.
- fanzhang 4y ago
  If this were a concern, a user can easily bypass this by having a work-for-hire person add a minor transform layer on top of the DALL-E generated images right?
  - JacobThreeThree 4y ago
    Wouldn't it have to meet the threshold of being a "transformative" work? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformative_use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformative_use
- leereeves 4y ago
  > DALL-E-generated images are most likely copyright-free The US Copyright Office did make a ruling that might suggest that recently[1], but crucially, in that case, the AI "didn't include an element of human authorship." The board might rule differently about DALL-E because the prompts do provide an opportunity for human creativity. And there's another important caveat that the felixreda.eu link seems to miss. DALL-E output, whether or not it's protected by copyright, can certainly infringe other copyrights, just like the output of any other mechanical process. In short, Disney can still sue if you distribute DALL-E generated images of Marvel characters. 1: https://www.theverge.com/2022/2/21/22944335/us-copyright-office-reject-ai-generated-art-recent-entrance-to-paradise https://www.theverge.com/2022/2/21/22944335/us-copyright-off...
- unnah 4y ago
  DALL-E can generate recognizable pictures of Homer Simpson, Batman and other commercial properties. Such images could easily be considered derivative works of the original copyrighted images that were used as training input. I'm sure there are plenty of corporate IP lawyers ready to argue the point at court.
  - numpad0 4y ago
    I'm kind of surprised that no one had found "verbatim copy" cases as were made with GitHub Copilot. Such exact copies in photography are likely easier to go for than with code snippets.
    - Nition 4y ago
      It might be interesting to find an image in the training set with a long, very unique description, and try that exact same description as input in DALL·E 2. Of course it's unlikely to produce the exact same image, or if it does, you've also discovered an incredible image compression algorithm.
      - numpad0 4y ago
        Oh I don’t have problems with DALL-E doing its thing, I just think it’s wrong if the purpose will be to cleanse off copyrights from images.
- totetsu 4y ago
  Can I infringe another Dalle users rights if I take an image generated by their acount and sell prints of it..?
mensetmanusman 4y ago
Image generating artificial intelligence is very analogous to a camera. Both technologies have billions of dollars of R&D and tens of thousands of engineers behind supply chains necessary to create the button that a user has the press.
- minimaxir 4y ago
  There have been decades of litigation around when/where/of whom you can take a photo. AI generated art isn't there.
LegitShady 4y ago
As far as I can tell they still own the images they just license your use of them commercially.
obert 4y ago
they still own the generated content, only grant usage. I have mixed feelings about this confused approach, it won’t last long. > …you own your Prompts and Uploads, and you agree that OpenAI owns all Generations…

berberous 4y ago

I think they are reacting to competition. MidJourney is amazing, was easier to get into, gives you commercial rights, and frankly I found more fun to use and even better output in most instances.

pitzips 4y ago
Midjourney recently changed their terms of service and now the creators own the image and give a license back to Midjourney. Pretty cool.
davedx 4y ago
MidJourney seems a little less all-out commercial. The way everyone’s creations are in giant open Discord channels is great too
- hiidrew 4y ago
  It's an interesting set-up. Viewing other's images and seeing their exact prompts is just as entertaining as generating your own.
MatthiasPortzel 4y ago
MidJourney definitely struggles more with complex prompts from what I saw. If you like the output more, that’s subjective, but I think DALL•E is the leader in the space by a wide margin.
- berberous 4y ago
  I think both have strengths and weaknesses, but I don’t disagree DALL-E in most instances is technically better at matching prompts. But I often enjoyed, artistically, the results of MidJourney more; it just felt fun to use and explore.
stoicjumbotron 4y ago
Really hope I get an invite for MidJourney soon. Been on the waitlist since March :(

rvz 4y ago

It also means there will possibly be another renaissance of fully automated, mass generated NFTs and tons of derivatives and remixes flooding the NFT market in an attempt to pump the NFT hype again. It doesn't matter, OpenAI wins anyway as these companies will pour hundreds of thousands into generated images. It seems that the NFT grift is about to be rebooted again, such that it isn't going to die that quickly. But still, eventually 90% of these JPEG NFTs will die anyway.

WalterSear 4y ago
NFTs were never limited by artwork availability - they are limited by wash-trading ability.
- rvz 4y ago
  These high photorealistic images can be generated on a mass-scale, completely automated without a human which ultimately cuts the need for an artist to do that. They will be replaced by DALL·E 2 for creating these illustrations, book covers, NFT variants, etc opening up the whole arena to anyone to do this themselves. All it takes is to describe what they want in text and less than a minute, the work is delivered as little as $15. OpenAI still wins either way. If a crypto company goes to using DALL·E 2 to generate photorealistic NFTs, they won't stop them and they will take the money.
  - WalterSear 4y ago
    I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. Art is already dirt cheap. People aren't buying NFTs for their content. This doesn't make it appreciably easier to con rubes.
Shorel 4y ago
A massive increase in the offer will mean the price of these NFTs will tend towards zero.

nutanc 4y ago

And I just used it to create cover art for a book published in Amazon :) https://twitter.com/nutanc/status/1549798460290764801?s=20&t=96UzbkzmLhu5v5o8SHgPJQ https://twitter.com/nutanc/status/1549798460290764801?s=20&t...

pqdbr 4y ago
What was your prompt?
- nutanc 4y ago
  "girl with a cap standing next to a shadow man having a speech bubble, digital art"

pferdone 4y ago

Does DALL-E create different outputs for the same input? How does ownership work there?

flatiron 4y ago
yes it will. it'll keep on augmenting the image until it recognizes it as the input
minimaxir 4y ago
Not only that, but you can also upload an image (that doesn't depict a real person) and generate variations of it without providing a prompt.

Melting_Harps 4y ago

> "Starting today, users get full usage rights to commercialize the images they create with DALL·E, including the right to reprint, sell, and merchandise. This includes images they generated during the research preview." >> And I just used it to create cover art for a book published in Amazon :) Man... what a missed opportunity for Altman... he could have had a really good cryptocurrency/token with a healthy ecosystem and a creative based community if he didn't push this Worldcoin biometric harvesting BS had he just waited for this to release and coupled it with access to GPT. This is the kind of thing that Web3 (a joke) was pushing for all along: revolutionary tech that the everyday person can understand with it's own token based ecosystem for access with full creative rights from the prompts. I wonder if he stepped down from Open AI and put it in a figurehead as CEO could this still work? > Why is using a token better than using money, in this case? It would be better for OpenAI if it can monetize not just its subscription based model via a token to pay for overhead and for further R/D but also for it's ability to issue tokens it can freely exchange for utility on it's platform for exclusive access outside of it's capped $15 model and allow for pay as you go models for those who don't have access to it like myself as it's limited to 1 million users. I don't want an account, and I think that type of gatekeeping wasn't cool during the gmail days either and I had early access back then too, but I'd still personally buy $100s of dollars worth of prompts right now since I think it is fascinating use of NLP and I'm just one of many missed opportunities and represent a lost userbase who just want access for specific projects. By doing this they can still retain the caps of useage on their platform and expand and contract them as they see fit without excluding others. This in turn could justify the continual investment from the VC World into these projects (under the guise of web3) and allow them to scale into viable businesses and further expand the use of AI/ML into other creative spaces, which as a person studying AI and ML and a background in BTC, is what we all wanted to see instead of these aimless bubbles in things like Solana or yield farming via fake DeFi projects like Calesius that we've seen. It would legitimize the use of a token for use of an ecosystem model outside of BTC, which to be honest doesn't really exist and has still a tarnished view with all these failed projects, while gaining reception amongst a greater audience since it's captivated so many since it's release.

pliny 4y ago
Why is using a token better than using money, in this case?

mensetmanusman 4y ago

They will benefit by getting additional feedback on which output images are most useful.

minimaxir 4y ago
DALL-E 2 has a "Save" feature which is likely a data gathering mechanism for this use case.

bilsbie 4y ago

Every tech should do this. Could google maps silently change your designation to a minority owned alternative?

vlunkr 4y ago

Is the lesson here that these images are worth nothing so they lose nothing by giving them away?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]