illustrated cover: what are the constraints?

[loic333]

Hello

For my new ongoing series, for which chapter 00 has been published and 11 chapters are awaiting moderation, I wanted to include an illustrated cover with an AI-generated drawing. Without explanation, my proposal was rejected, even though there is no nudity or pornography. Are you familiar with the restrictions that apply to covers?
Have a good day,
Loïc

 

[Bamagan]

From the Series FAQ:

• You must own the copyright or a copyright license to the work (no images downloaded off the internet).

AI generated images are probably being rejected for that reason (currently, neither you nor the company providing the software can copyright its output), or because of the site's general reluctance to allow AI generated content to be hosted on the site. The linked FAQ has a little bit more to say about the subject. It doesn't explicitly forbid such images, possibly because older and simpler graphics programs have long been used to create cover art composed of 'stock' elements. But the images newer AI programs are producing are a different matter and seem less likely to be acceptable.

 

[loic333]

From the Series FAQ:

• You must own the copyright or a copyright license to the work (no images downloaded off the internet).

AI generated images are probably being rejected for that reason (currently, neither you nor the company providing the software can copyright its output), or because of the site's general reluctance to allow AI generated content to be hosted on the site. The linked FAQ has a little bit more to say about the subject. It doesn't explicitly forbid such images, possibly because older and simpler graphics programs have long been used to create cover art composed of 'stock' elements. But the images newer AI programs are producing are a different matter and seem less likely to be acceptable.

Hello

Thank you for your feedback. I can understand, but at the same time, how can we not give credit to an AI that creates an image based on your instructions? So, someone using Photoshop would also be breaking the law, since the modifications are made by a program and not by the photographer. This position is very difficult to grasp. This hunt for AI is becoming hard to follow in 2026, when computers and their machine learning capabilities are older than most computer users, and younger than the existence of this invention.

 

[Bamagan]

Hello

Thank you for your feedback. I can understand, but at the same time, how can we not give credit to an AI that creates an image based on your instructions? So, someone using Photoshop would also be breaking the law, since the modifications are made by a program and not by the photographer. This position is very difficult to grasp. This hunt for AI is becoming hard to follow in 2026, when computers and their machine learning capabilities are older than most computer users, and younger than the existence of this invention.

The basic argument for not 'giving credit' to an AI art program is that it functions by rearranging elements contained in its training data to conform with whatever it calculates based on user entries, and most of the training data was obtained without permission and is therefore in violation of copyright laws.

The user's role is more like a restaurant patron who requests a specific meal, at which point a robot chef robs a grocery store and prepares something according to a recipe based on keywords in the request. The patron then takes the meal home and claims to have made dinner.

 

[loic333]

If I follow your reasoning, when I prepare beef bourguignon, adding my own pastry and a piece of chocolate, or when I make my pot-au-feu by first cutting an onion in half and charring the cut side without any fat, and then simmering it in my broth, as my grandfather taught me, then since we didn't invent these recipes, we can't claim our own personal pastry. The AI creator for this image reproduced the idea I provided and wrote down in nearly 500 words. I made it start over several times to get roughly what I expected. Sorry, but I'm neither Dali nor Michelangelo. I could create a cubic structure and call myself a genius , but even that I couldn't do. When Leonardo da Vinci commissioned a painting from one of his students, did he have the right to claim authorship and be unable to sign it?... a vast debate, especially for a simple illustrated cover

 

[Bamagan]

If I follow your reasoning, when I prepare beef bourguignon, adding my own pastry and a piece of chocolate, or when I make my pot-au-feu by first cutting an onion in half and charring the cut side without any fat, and then simmering it in my broth, as my grandfather taught me, then since we didn't invent these recipes, we can't claim our own personal pastry. The AI creator for this image reproduced the idea I provided and wrote down in nearly 500 words. I made it start over several times to get roughly what I expected. Sorry, but I'm neither Dali nor Michelangelo. I could create a cubic structure and call myself a genius , but even that I couldn't do. When Leonardo da Vinci commissioned a painting from one of his students, did he have the right to claim authorship and be unable to sign it?... a vast debate, especially for a simple illustrated cover

You are not following my reasoning, though. Following the recipe is not the problem; if you buy the onions or whatever and prepare them, the end result is unambiguously yours. The problems are the robot/AI doesn't own the ingredients, so the end user won't own them/the requested product either, and the user is not the one actually doing the work of arranging them, they're just placing an order. Yes, the order might be complex and there's some amount of 'work' involved in getting the final product to be satisfactory, but placing an order is not equivocal to doing the actual work of assembling or compositing or whatever.

If you want to expand the argument to philosophy and Da Vinci and whatever else, feel free, but it really has very little bearing on the immediate issue of your image being rejected. Publishing something on this site requires the user to assert that they have clear rights to everything they submit. You may think that AI generated images made to your specifications are yours, but that is not currently true, at least not in the legal sense that pertains to copyrights and publishing. Maybe that will change someday; I personally hope not.

In any event, your tech support question has been answered. I bid you adieu.

 

[loic333]

You are not following my reasoning, though. Following the recipe is not the problem; if you buy the onions or whatever and prepare them, the end result is unambiguously yours. The problems are the robot/AI doesn't own the ingredients, so the end user won't own them/the requested product either, and the user is not the one actually doing the work of arranging them, they're just placing an order. Yes, the order might be complex and there's some amount of 'work' involved in getting the final product to be satisfactory, but placing an order is not equivocal to doing the actual work of assembling or compositing or whatever.

If you want to expand the argument to philosophy and Da Vinci and whatever else, feel free, but it really has very little bearing on the immediate issue of your image being rejected. Publishing something on this site requires the user to assert that they have clear rights to everything they submit. You may think that AI generated images made to your specifications are yours, but that is not currently true, at least not in the legal sense that pertains to copyrights and publishing. Maybe that will change someday; I personally hope not.

In any event, your tech support question has been answered. I bid you adieu.

Merci à vous, c'est trés clair, et je viens donc de demander au site qui m'a créé l'image sur mes recommandations, de me fournir un droit d'utilisation de l'image créé sur mes indication passez un excellent weekend