Usually yes, you may use it; owning exclusive rights to it is a different matter. Whether you may publish or sell AI output depends on the tool’s terms and your plan. Whether anyone can stop others copying it depends on US copyright law, where the Copyright Office concluded in January 2025 that purely AI-generated material is not protected, and that prompts alone do not give enough control. Treat the two questions separately. This page is a reading of public documents and is not legal advice; for a specific project, ask a qualified lawyer in your jurisdiction.
Question 1: does the tool let you use it?
Read from each vendor’s own page on 29 Sep 2026. Document dates: OpenAI Terms of Use (Europe edition, “Updated: 16 January 2026”), Midjourney Terms of Service (effective 27 May 2026), Leonardo help article “Commercial Usage” (dated 25 August 2026); the Ideogram FAQ and Adobe plans page carry no date. Vendor wording is paraphrased except where quoted.
| Tool | What the page says | Condition that can bite |
|---|---|---|
| OpenAI (ChatGPT, API) | “As between you and OpenAI, and to the extent permitted by applicable law,” you own the Output, and OpenAI assigns “all our right, title, and interest, if any” | Output may not be unique; the assignment does not extend to other users’ output or third-party output |
| Midjourney | You own the assets you create “to the fullest extent possible under applicable law”, and ownership persists after cancelling (Terms); the help article says you own images and videos you create | A company with more than $1,000,000 a year in revenue must subscribe to Pro or Mega (the Terms say to own its assets); an upscaled image made by someone else stays theirs. You also grant Midjourney a perpetual licence to your outputs, and you indemnify it against third-party claims |
| Ideogram | Ideogram claims no ownership; use is free for any purpose including commercial | Images are public by default; unpublished generation is a Plus or Pro feature |
| Leonardo.Ai | Commercial use is allowed | Free plan output is public and reusable by others; private ownership applies to paid private generations |
| Adobe Firefly | Outputs described as safe for commercial use | IP indemnification is mentioned only for eligible enterprise customers |
| ElevenLabs (voice) | Free plan has no commercial licence; paid plans have one | The pricing page does not spell out the licence; read the terms and never clone a voice without permission |
Two patterns. Free plans are the ones that restrict: Leonardo’s free output is public and ElevenLabs’ free plan excludes commercial use. And “you own it” from a vendor is a contract statement between you and the vendor. It says nothing about whether copyright law gives you anything to own.
Question 2: does copyright protect it?
The US Copyright Office’s Part 2 report (29 Jan 2025) reached these conclusions, quoted closely:
| Situation | Office’s position |
|---|---|
| Using AI as a tool while a human shapes the work | Does not affect protection for the output |
| Wholly AI-generated material | Copyright does not extend to it |
| Prompts only | “prompts do not alone provide sufficient control”, based on the functioning of current generally available technology |
| Your own drawing, text or photo fed in as input | You keep copyright in the expression that is perceptible in the output |
| Selecting, arranging or creatively modifying AI outputs | Protectable as your selection, coordination, arrangement or modifications |
| Any borderline case | Decided case by case |
The courts point the same way. The Supreme Court declined on 2 Mar 2026 to hear Thaler v. Perlmutter, leaving in place the ruling that the Copyright Act requires a human author, as reported by Mayer Brown. That case involved an image the applicant said the AI made on its own, so it does not settle how much human input is enough. Law firms tracking the area describe that threshold as still open.
Other countries differ, and this page covers the US only.
What this means for a marketer
| You are | Practical reading |
|---|---|
| Using AI images as ads, thumbnails or product art | Terms usually allow it on a paid plan. Others may be free to copy the image, so do not build a brand on an unmodified generated logo |
| Using AI text in blog posts | You may publish it; the protectable part is the human writing, editing and structure you add. Search is a separate question, covered in does Google penalise AI content |
| Registering a work with AI in it | The Office’s 2023 guidance says applicants must disclose AI-generated content and briefly describe the human contribution, and must not list the AI tool as an author |
| Needing indemnification | Compare the image generator terms; of those read here, only Adobe mentions it, for eligible enterprise customers |
| Voiceover for published video | Use a plan that carries a commercial licence; see transcription and voice tools |
Steps that follow from the documents
- Put the tool, plan and date next to every asset you publish, so you can show which terms applied.
- Keep your own edits and the prompt history that show human selection and arrangement.
- Avoid prompts that name living artists’ styles or trademarks; the vendor’s ownership language does not cover a third party’s rights.
- For anything valuable, such as a logo, hand-draw or hire a designer for the final version.
- Recheck the terms; several of these pages changed during 2026.
Method
Researched from the Copyright Office’s Part 2 report and 2023 registration guidance (read in full text), one named law-firm summary of the Supreme Court denial, and each vendor’s terms or help page, read 29 Sep 2026. Vendor wording is paraphrased except where quoted. Nothing here comes from using the products, and it is not legal advice or a substitute for a lawyer in your jurisdiction. The tool-by-tool image comparison has the plan prices behind these conditions.