[BadCookie]

It comes down to who is liable for the edge cases, I suspect. Adobe will compensate the end user if they get sued for using a Firefly-generated image (probably up to some limit).

Getting sued occasionally is a cost of doing business in some industries. It’s about risk mitigation rather than risk elimination.

[AnthonyMouse]

Feels like "paying extra for the extended warranty" vibes. What it covers isn't much (do you expect someone to come after you in small claims court and if they do, was that your main concern?) meanwhile the big claim you're actually worried about is what it doesn't cover.

And if you really wanted insurance then why not get it from an actual insurance company?

[rincebrain]

Because almost everything is risk mitigation or reduction, not elimination.

In particular, in the US, the legal apparatus has been gamified to the point that the expectation becomes people will sue if their expected value out of it is positive even if the case is insane on its merits, because it's much more likely someone with enough risk and cost will settle as the cheaper option.

And in that world, there is nothing that completely eliminates the risk of being sued in bad faith - but the more things you put in your mitigation basket, the narrower the error bars are on the risk even if the 99.999th percentile is still the same.

[jonplackett]

All the indemnities I’ve read have clauses though that say if you intentionally use it to make something copyrighted they won’t protect you.

So if you put obviously copyrighted things in the prompt you’ll still be on your own.