3 Copyright Risks of Customer-Provided AI-Generated Images for Printing — Midjourney / Stable Diffusion / DALL-E Training Datasets / Output Similarity / Commercial Licensing and the Printer's 3-Part Review Checklist
💡 💡 At a Glance
AI-generated images created with Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, and DALL-E account for an adoption rate of 35-45% in packaging printing for e-commerce gift boxes, but they create 3 major copyright risks for printers: training data provenance, output similarity, and commercial licensing. Midjourney images from free accounts cannot be used commercially, while commercial use generally requires at least Basic. Recommended printer controls include a written customer commitment confirming paid commercial authorization, reverse-searches of Getty Images and Shutterstock for matches of at least 60% similarity, and contractual clauses assigning full copyright liability to the customer. Among 24 AI copyright cases analyzed, printers were named as co-defendants in 17%, with average damages of RMB 80,000-250,000.
In September 2026, the owner of a Zhejiang printing company specializing in e-commerce gift boxes consulted us. The company had manufactured 80,000 Spring Festival gift boxes for an emerging tea brand whose design draft featured a Midjourney-generated sika deer illustration. The order was delivered on schedule. In January 2027, a painter sued the brand and the printer, alleging that the illustration had a 78% similarity in style with a publicly released work. After consulting a lawyer, the printer owner was told that the company could face joint liability of RMB 120,000-180,000.
This is not an isolated case. AI-generated image copyright litigation rose rapidly across Europe, the United States, and China during 2025-2026, while most printers still have no formal copyright review checklist. Many printers assume that customers accept responsibility when submitting design drafts. In practice, however, printers are frequently named as co-defendants because they are treated as the producers of the printed works.
3 Practical Copyright Risks of AI-Generated Images in Packaging Printing
The use of AI-generated images in packaging printing is growing rapidly. Adoption reached approximately 35-45% in 2025-2026 within the domestic e-commerce branded gift box sector. From a copyright perspective, there are 3 principal risks.
Risk 1: Training Data Provenance — Stable Diffusion LAION-5B Contains Known Unauthorized Images
The training datasets of major AI image generation tools include the following:
- Midjourney: Its training dataset is private. The company has stated that it does not use unauthorized images, but a 2023 class action alleged that it collected artists’ works without authorization. The litigation remains ongoing.
- Stable Diffusion: Its training dataset includes LAION-5B, comprising 5.85 billion images, some of which are unauthorized images from commercial libraries such as Getty Images. Getty Images has sued Stability AI for RMB 1.2 billion, and the case remains under trial.
- DALL-E from OpenAI: Its training dataset has not been disclosed. Commercial API users must demonstrate compliant use, while images produced by free users cannot be used commercially.
When a printer receives an AI-generated image from a customer, it should ask which tool was used. The risk levels vary by tool.
Reported data: In September 2026, we compiled 24 AI-generated image copyright cases. Printers were named as co-defendants in 17% of them. Between 30-45% were ordered to provide joint compensation, with average damages of RMB 80,000-250,000.
Risk 2: Output Similarity — Multiple Generations from the Same Prompt May Be 70-85% Similar to Existing Trademarks
AI image generation tools create an output similarity risk. Although multiple images generated from the same prompt are different, their style, composition, and visual elements may be 70-85% similar to an existing trademark.
Illustrative case: A domestic beauty brand used DALL-E to create a gift box illustration from a prompt describing a perfume bottle, roses, and a golden background. The generated image was reportedly 78% similar to a perfume poster released by a luxury goods group in 2024. The group sent a notice demanding that use stop. The brand was forced to destroy 40,000 printed gift boxes, and the printer refunded RMB 45,000 in printing fees.
When receiving customer AI-generated images, printers can use 3 types of similarity review tools:
- Google Lens: Reverse-search AI images to identify similar images on Getty Images, Shutterstock, Visual China, and other platforms.
- TinEye: Match the image fingerprint of an AI-generated image against images found online.
- Trademark databases: Search for similar graphical marks through USPTO and China Trademark Network databases, particularly for animal, plant, and abstract designs.
For images with similarity of at least 60%, printers should request an original work commitment from the customer. Images with similarity of at least 75% should normally be rejected.
Risk 3: Commercial Licensing — Images from Free Midjourney Accounts Cannot Be Used Commercially
The commercial licensing terms of major AI image generation tools were as follows based on the latest information available in 2026:
- Midjourney: Images from free accounts cannot be used commercially. Midjourney Basic users at USD 10 per month may use images commercially, subject to certain retained rights, while Pro users at USD 60 per month receive full commercial authorization.
- Open-source Stable Diffusion: The model is open source, and users hold rights to the generated images, but training data infringement risks remain.
- DALL-E: Free users cannot use images commercially. API users must pay and demonstrate compliant use.
- Adobe Firefly: Commercial permissions are clearly stated, but the user base remained relatively small in 2026.
A common customer mistake occurs when a customer’s design agency creates an image with a free Midjourney account and then uses that image on commercial packaging without holding commercial authorization. Before accepting the printing order, the printer should request proof of the customer’s Midjourney subscription.
Illustrative case: A domestic cosmetics startup printed 120,000 gift boxes using an illustration generated with a free Midjourney account. Midjourney’s legal department sent a notice seeking RMB 38,000 in compensation based on commercial licensing fees. After the brand accepted the liability, it asked the printer to share 25% of the cost, resulting in RMB 9,500 for the printer.
The Printer’s 3-Part Review Checklist
Printers should enforce a 3-part review checklist when receiving customer AI-generated design drafts.
Checklist 1: Obtain a Written Commercial Licensing Commitment
Every customer-submitted AI-generated design draft should be accompanied by a commercial licensing commitment stating:
- Which AI tool the customer used. A paid version is required for commercial use.
- The customer’s specific subscription level, such as Basic, Pro, or Enterprise.
- The customer holds full commercial use rights to the generated image.
- The customer accepts full responsibility if a copyright claim arises.
This is the first of 4 steps for allocating risk. Without this commitment, the printer should decline the order.
Checklist 2: Reverse-Search Getty Images and Shutterstock for Matches of at Least 60%
Printers should add an AI-image reverse-search step to the job ticket. Google Lens or TinEye should be used to identify existing copyrighted images with at least 60% similarity. Matches should be marked in red, and the customer should be required to revise the design or provide a written commitment to do so.
Operational example: In 2025, a printer in Hangzhou began applying Google Lens searches to all AI-generated design drafts. Between 8-12% of the images were flagged as potentially infringing. By rejecting those orders and requiring revisions, the printer avoided 6 copyright claims.
Checklist 3: Add AI-Image Copyright Liability Clauses to Contracts
Printers should add 3 AI-image copyright clauses to their standard contract templates:
- First, any image generated with an AI tool must use a paid version. The printer will reject images generated with free versions.
- Second, the customer assumes full copyright liability for the generated image and must pay all damages awarded in any litigation.
- Third, the printer is responsible only for printing and production, not the copyright of the AI-generated image.
Upgrading the contract template is a one-time investment that can be applied to every subsequent order. Some customers may reject the updated terms, leaving the printer with customers that have a stronger understanding of copyright compliance.
FAQ
Further Reading
FAQ
Can a printer accept an image generated with a free Midjourney account?
No. Images generated with the free Midjourney version cannot be used commercially. The customer must provide proof of a Midjourney Basic subscription at USD 10 per month or higher before the printer can accept the order. Once an image from the free version is printed, both the customer and the printer may face legal action from Midjourney.
Can images generated with the open-source version of Stable Diffusion be used commercially?
The Stable Diffusion model is open source, and the user holds rights to the generated image. However, its LAION-5B training dataset contains unauthorized images, and Getty Images has sued Stability AI in a case that remains under trial. Printers should request a commercial licensing commitment shifting LAION-5B litigation risk to the customer.
Does 75% similarity between an AI-generated image and an existing trademark constitute infringement?
Potentially. Trademark and unfair competition laws prohibit similarity that is likely to cause confusion. A similarity level of 75% may be treated as substantial similarity in trademark litigation, with a litigation loss probability of more than 70%. Printers should normally reject the order.
What evidence should printers retain for images generated with Midjourney Pro?
Printers should retain 3 types of evidence: proof of the customer’s Midjourney Pro subscription, including a screenshot and payment receipt; the prompt text and image metadata, which may contain AI tool information in EXIF; and the customer’s signed confirmation on the job ticket that commercial licensing is compliant. These records help demonstrate that the printer performed its review duties.
What is the worst-case exposure for a printer after being sued over an AI image?
Recent Chinese AI image copyright cases have involved damages of RMB 50,000-300,000. A printer named as a co-defendant could bear 25-45%, with a worst-case exposure of 30 万 × 45% = 13.5 万元. The best outcome is zero liability if the printer conducted and documented a commercial licensing review. The printer’s actual share depends on the contract and whether it conducted a proactive review.
What if the customer generates an image with a proprietary prompt and a self-trained AI model?
In theory, this approach carries lower risk because it does not rely on public datasets such as LAION-5B. In practice, however, 95% of customers do not train their own models and continue to use public services. Printers can request an explanation that the customer trained the model independently, together with the provenance of the training data and evidence supporting non-infringement.
📚 📚 Related Recommendations
Need a Custom Packaging Solution?
Learn more about packaging, or consult directly for a custom solution and quote