Ok i need to talk about this because i recently found out a designer at another agency used midjourney for hero images on a client website and didnt disclose it. the client found out and threatened legal action
so where does the community stand: is using AI-generated assets in client work without telling them a red flag or fair game?
arguments for “fair game”:
- we use stock photos without disclosing where we got them
- we use plugins and presets that automate parts of our work
- the client is paying for the end result not the process
- as long as the quality is good who cares how it was made
arguments for “red flag”:
- there are real copyright and licensing questions with AI generated images that are still unresolved in court
- the client is paying for human creativity, theres an implied expectation
- if you wouldnt put “images: midjourney” in your credits, you know its deceptive
- stock photos have clear licensing. AI images… dont, really
where i personally land: i think you HAVE to disclose. not because of ethics necessarily but because of liability. if a client finds out later (and they will eventually) the damage to your reputation and the potential legal issues arent worth the time saved
the designer who got caught? lost the client AND the agency is now dealing with potential copyright issues since the AI images are on a live commercial website
what do you think? have you used AI assets in client work? did you disclose?
i run a creative agency and we have a strict policy: full disclosure on any AI-generated assets. its in our contracts, its in our process documentation, and we discuss it upfront during project kickoff
not because were anti-AI but because the licensing situation is genuinely unresolved. using AI images commercially is a legal gray area and our clients deserve to understand that risk. the agency that didnt disclose was playing with fire
The stock photo comparison doesnt hold up imo. stock photos have explicit commercial licenses. you can prove you have the right to use them. AI generated images? the copyright ownership question is literally being argued in federal court right now
for packaging design (my field) using uncleared AI imagery on a product that ships to stores could be a massive liability if the copyright question goes the wrong way. not worth it
Disclosed or not, im more concerned about quality. ive seen AI images used in professional work that have subtle tells - weird lighting inconsistencies, slightly off perspectives, that diffusion ‘smoothness’ on textures. it cheapens the overall design even if the client doesnt notice consciously
but yeah, always disclose. the ‘stock photo comparison’ is cope. we all know its different
Interesting timing on this thread. one of my logo clients specifically asked for a ‘no AI’ clause in our contract last month. not for the logo itself (obviously hand-crafted) but for any supporting brand imagery, mockup elements, and presentation visuals
the market is moving toward disclosure requirements whether we like it or not. better to get ahead of it than get caught behind
The legal dimension is important but theres also a practical one: AI-generated images cant be trademarked or copyrighted (at least under current US copyright office guidance). so if you use an AI hero image on a clients website, that image has NO intellectual property protection. anyone can use it. a competitor could put the same style image on their site and theres nothing you can do
try explaining that to a client after the fact. always disclose