Red Flag or Fair Game: Using AI-Generated Assets in Client Work Without Telling Them

Authentic Creative Process
1

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?

2

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

3

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

4

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