Can You Use AI-Generated Images Commercially?

In most cases, you can use AI-generated images commercially, because the terms of use of the popular tools generally allow it. However, that alone isn't enough. You also need to answer two more questions: does a right arise in this image that protects you, and does the image infringe someone else's copyright, trademark or personality rights? In this post we cover AI image copyright through these three questions, at the level of general information.

Three separate questions

Before you use an AI image on your website, your packaging or in an ad, keep these three questions apart:

1. Permission: Do the terms of the tool I used allow me to use this image for commercial purposes?
2. Protection: Do I have any rights in this image? If someone else uses the same image, can I object?
3. Infringement: Does this image use an element belonging to someone else's work, trademark or persona without permission?

1. Permission: what do the tools' terms of use say?

The summaries below reflect the terms in force when we published this post (July 2026). Of course, terms can change. Always read the current text for the tool you use yourself.

OpenAI (ChatGPT and image generation): Under the terms of use effective from 1 January 2026, to the extent permitted by applicable law, you retain ownership of your input and you own the output. OpenAI assigns to you any rights it has in the output. The terms also state explicitly that output may not be unique and that other users may receive similar output.

Midjourney: Under the terms of service dated 27 May 2026, you own the images you create to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law. However, if you are a company with annual gross revenue above USD 1 million, or an employee of such a company, you must subscribe to the "Pro" or "Mega" plan to own the images.

Adobe Firefly: Adobe states that it trains its Firefly models on Adobe Stock images, openly licensed content and public domain content whose copyright has expired. Under certain enterprise agreements, it also offers intellectual property indemnification (IP indemnity) for Firefly outputs. However, this coverage applies only to qualifying features. It excludes features the interface labels as working with non-Adobe models, as well as features marked "beta" or "trial."

The practical takeaways:

• "You own it" is not a guarantee of protection. A tool can only assign the rights it holds itself. If no copyright arises in the output at all, there is nothing to assign.
• There is no guarantee of uniqueness. Your competitor could generate a similar image.
• Plan and company size matter. Terms may differ on free or lower-tier plans.
• Keep records. Save which tool you used, on which date, on which plan, and how you produced the image.

2. Protection: does an AI image count as a "work"?

The general framework in Turkey: FSEK

In Turkey, the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works (FSEK, Law No. 5846) governs copyright. Under Article 1/B of the law, a work is an intellectual or artistic product "bearing the characteristics of its author" that falls into one of the categories listed in the law. The author is the person who "creates the work." Article 8 repeats the same principle: the author of a work is the person who created it.

The law has no specific provision on AI output. The prevailing view in legal literature is that AI itself cannot be an author. Whether works where a human makes a meaningful and decisive contribution to the creative process can qualify as works is under debate. We could not find any specific statutory rule or official guidance on this. So whether an AI image enjoys protection is uncertain, and courts and experts assess it case by case.

An example from abroad: the US

Although it isn't binding in Turkey, the US example is useful because it shows how others are handling the issue:

• In a report published in January 2025, the US Copyright Office concluded that with current technology, writing prompts alone does not provide enough human control to establish authorship of the output. On the other hand, protection is possible when a person uses their own work as input and it is perceptible in the output. The same goes for creative edits and selections a person makes to AI output. The Office says it will assess each case individually.
• In Thaler v. Perlmutter, the US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled in March 2025 that copyright requires a human to have created the work in the first instance. On 2 March 2026, the US Supreme Court declined to hear the case, so that ruling stands.

The practical message for you: if you want to be able to claim rights in an image, the human contribution must be decisive and documentable. There is a difference between taking AI output as a starting point and putting serious design work into it, and using the output as is.

3. Infringement: does the image touch someone else's rights?

This is where the most concrete risk in commercial use lies. Lacking copyright protection "only" means you can't protect your image. Infringement, on the other hand, can lead to claims against you.

• Well-known characters and works: Output that closely resembles a cartoon character, a specific work by a famous artist or a well-known photograph is risky. In June 2025, Disney and Universal sued Midjourney in the US, alleging unauthorized use of their characters. Lawsuits like this show the problem isn't just theoretical.
• Trademarks and logos: If a real brand's logo, packaging or watermark appears in the image, a trademark issue may arise. In the UK case between Getty Images and Stability AI, the court rejected Getty's copyright claim in November 2025. However, it found to a limited extent that the appearance of Getty and iStock watermarks in images generated by some older model versions amounted to trademark infringement.
• Real people: Content that imitates a real person's face or voice raises separate issues of personality rights and personal data protection. The Turkish Data Protection Authority's (KVKK) guide on generative AI also points out that "deepfake" content can cause privacy, reputation and security problems when misused.
• AI images from stock image sites: For an AI image you license from a stock site, that site's license terms apply. Check whether the license covers commercial use and uses such as packaging or logos.

Transparency obligations: the EU example

If your work is aimed at the European Union, you also need to follow the transparency obligations in Article 50 of the EU AI Act. This article should apply from 2 August 2026. It requires those who use realistic "deepfake" images, audio or video to disclose that the content is artificially generated or manipulated. For work that is evidently artistic, creative, satirical or fictional, however, the obligation covers only an appropriate disclosure that doesn't hamper the presentation of the content.

Risk table by type of use

We covered logos in detail in our post on designing a logo with AI, and the registration process in our post on trademark registration. In addition, most AI images are pixel-based (raster). We explained why this can be a problem for print and logo use in our post on the difference between vector and raster images.

A short checklist before using AI-generated images commercially

1. I have read the tool's current terms of use. My plan and company size are suitable for commercial use.
2. The image contains no well-known character, work, trademark, logo or watermark.
3. The image doesn't show a real person in a recognizable way, or I have obtained the necessary permissions.
4. I have recorded which tool I used, on which date and how I produced the image.
5. If I need to claim rights in the image, the human contribution is decisive and documentable.
6. For long-term work I will register, such as a logo or packaging, I have consulted an expert.

Our experience

Erdoğan Kamar founded Artsution in 2024, bringing his graphic design, digital drawing and illustration work together under a registered trademark. As a studio that has registered its own brand, and as a team that creates identity and packaging work for clients, we take originality and rights ownership seriously.

Our approach: we may use AI images as a tool for exploring ideas and setting direction. However, we don't deliver a logo that a client will register, a packaging design meant to last for years or an illustration as AI output. Instead, that work goes through a design process whose rights and origins are clear.

Frequently asked questions

Conclusion

In most cases, it is possible to use AI images commercially. However, "the tool allows it" doesn't mean the image belongs to you and is protected, or that it doesn't touch anyone's rights. For internal use and short-lived content, the risk is low. For long-lived work you will register, such as logos, packaging and brand identity, a design process with clear origins and rights is safer.

Original design work for your brand

If you are planning an original brand identity or illustration project for your brand, get in touch with us. For an overview of where AI is useful in business, take a look at our post on AI for business.