Watch This Before Selling A.I Art On Etsy Using MidJourney (Avoid Future Lawsuits)

Watch This Before Selling A.I Art On Etsy Using MidJourney (Avoid Future Lawsuits)

Additional Resources For Building A Profitable Brand

QUESTION — Have a question about selling online, building a brand or anything else? Post in comments section of this video!

Subscribe to Brand Creators Here:

Scott Voelker on Social Media:

#etsy #etsyshop #etsyseller #etsyfinds #sellingonetsy #ecommerce #ecommercebusiness

[danieldunkley]

The point is simple. Its legal and theres nothing anyone can do about it wether we like it or not. I just saved you 25 minutes. Not knocking the video theres some nuances but other than an outright copy its totally legal which is just the same as its ever been.

[BillGraper]

Bottom line: Make sure Midjourney creates the images 100% from your prompts & make sure you're paying for one of their subscriptions. Then you can use the images for commercial purposes.

[TPACasual]

I'm a professional artist, I have the highest tier subscription that hides all my creations, and I mess with what AI made on my wacom so not really worried about much.

[AmberCox]

I have a bachelors in design and am certified in 3D design. Since using midjourney I am able to create new works that have never been created nor imagined. Why would I want to wait 3 hours for a 3D render when I can use midjourney and get more done in those 3 hours. I feed the Ai my own art and have published several books that are copyrighted bc I used my own art to generate the final result assisted w a.I

[campeador]

I really appreciate that it's free content and that you've invested time and energy to develop the content, however, please either get to the point or at least provide markers so I can skip to the necessary parts. Thanks for the info, much appreciated.

[hoffmantube]

OMG just get to the point! I can't take it.

[TheFakieEdits]

I don’t know if the explanation for taking others work is as accurate.

I’m a graphic designer at a design agency and we have been looking at the AI image generators and using certain phrases like, ‘trending on’ or ‘inspired by’ and the results are stepping into that grey area, where it does look very similar to the artists original. They are more derivative than inspired by.

I think most people using these generators will get results that are different enough, but for some prompts the results are too close in our view to the originals. We as a studio wouldn’t want to present those ideas or images as they aren’t different enough.

Would like to hear your thoughts.

[eightstitches]

To those who can’t bother watch the entire vid. The answer is *drum roll* *extended pause*

It depends

[marcus_ohreallyus]

Cheating? That's a pretty dumb argument people are using. Art is about the end result, not how it was created. If someone connects with a piece of artwork, whether a human painstakingly created it over many hours, or a monkey threw paint on a wall or ai came up with it in a few seconds... it's legitimate artwork. Period. And I'm saying this as a professional artist for 25 years.

[KuraSourTakanHour]

I've seen great success with Playground AI for certain artistic styles, and when it comes to stylizing public domain images into essentially a new piece. Also using something like photoshop to take objects from other images into your own scene, uploading that image as reference to the AI, and it does magic in bringing together your photoshopped picture into a cohesive style.

[rocknrollteacherpy]

Could you just imagine for a second if something written "In the style of" in any type of artistic expression could had been copyrighted? How many great songs in the case of music, that were inspired by many great artists wouldn't have been made

[wklein]

Great video! You just answered all of my questions. I was using a program, although I can't remember which one. It brought back images that seemed to have artist signatures or stamps resembling a signature block, which made me very uncomfortable. Consequently, I stopped using that program. Even though I contacted their helpdesk to inquire about the images and uploaded them for review, they confirmed that the program inserted signatures as needed, which still made me uneasy. Therefore, I believe it's crucial to trust your instincts and avoid using content with copyright or signature type markings.

[mikeconnelly]

Surely if the same prompt can produce almost infinite variations the variation that your using is unique to you meaning that no one else is likely to create the same design without copying the image you’ve created.

[Sashaluvs]

the problem is taking existing artwork and putting it in the AI system itself without the artist consent and compensation.

[michaelr]

What I do for my commercial work is to create art in the style of artist who have been deceased for over 95 years. This way if the algorithm takes in images actually created by the artist for generation, than all of those images are fair use at this point anyway. (There may be exceptions to the 95-year rule, but I specifically only use artists not subject to those exceptions, like Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo.)

[voiceoftheparrot]

I view Midjourney as the tool. I'm still thinking up the concept and having to spend crazy amts of time getting something close. But, that's just me.

[madshader]

Midjourney isn't a "tool". It's a 'personal team of artists that interpret what it is that you want'. No different than say an Art Director that has a team of artists working under him and he tells them his 'prompt' of what he needs from them, and they get to work creating something that they interpret is what their boss wants created. I see so many people trying to call AI a "tool" and it's just categorically incorrect.

[anjadedobbelaere]

Thank you for this video, it was very clarifying!

[Supramonk]

This all said in the video is debatable, and you can go against styles are not registered, registered drawings, trademarks and patents can be discussed in your National institute of industrial property . Lawsuits are rare and need be be proven that is a copy

[HellcatM]

Here's my two cents on the subject. If someone used AI to alter a picture or make something that uses copywritten material (for instance Disney, DC, Picaso...to name a few) that should be illegal. BUT if you're having an AI, make original content then it should be legal and here's why. If I have a friend whose artistic draw a picture for me and they say "if you sell this, you can keep the money" that's legal so if an AI company says a person can sell the original content that it makes then people should be able to do it. Artists may not like it because these people are not using a pencil, paint, for instance but that's just their opinion. If I tell an AI to make a cartoon cat picture, it's me giving the AI the idea that's in my head. I may not be drawing it myself, but it is my idea. A friend of mine once said "Ideas don't mean anything, it making them come to life that means something." If someone doesn't know how to draw or code and they can use AI as a tool to get their ideas out there, then their ideas do mean something.

So as long as people aren't plagiarizing, using copywritten material or making deepfakes, using AI to help bring ideas to reality shouldn't be illegal.