"Can existing art be used for strictly playtest purposes?" Topic

A friend is developing a scifi card game. For development he has used existing art from other various games.

He wants to open up the game to playtesters. The group will have a dedicated Discord Group and be private/by invite only.

Is it okay to still use the art? If he adds "Placeholder Only" over the art is that okay?

Or should he scrub the art and have blank areas?

Thanks

That's a tough one.

If it's private/invite only, then I think it's still equivalent to playing with a few friends, so I think it would be OK.

I always come to TMP for free legal or medical advice.

But seriously, there are a bunch of questions that need EXPERT legal advice.
Will he be copying existing artwork? Is that art copyrighted?
Will he be charging money?

I'm pretty sure you will get a lot of "it seems to me that … so you might be okay" responses.

It seems to me that…
1. Get REAL legal advice.
2. Contact the artwork copyright holders.
3. Get REAL legal advice. (Rinse and repeat.)

It seems to me that using existing art is risky.

If its playtest for a commercial product, then it is use for a commercial purpose, regardless of who conducts the playtesting.

Would anyone find out/have evidence? This question equals Are any of your friend's friends narcs? or Is anyone likely to publish selfies or discussions of the playtest in public (like here or anywhere on the Interwebz)?

The real question is would anyone with standing to sue care? Unless your friend is running a major commercial interest, or has deep pockets and hasn't properly insulated his personal from the corporate finanaces, it would have to be a suit "on principle" rather than to collect actual damages (assuming any could be demonstrated).

I still wouldn't do it.

If your friend wants some help generating placeholder AI art for the playtest, shoot me a PM.

Simple answer: No, he cannot use someone else's art without permission. The end, no buts or maybes. Personal use with friends is one thing. Handing it out to playtesters, cue the sirens.

Long answer: What etotheipi said.

However: There is public domain art out there which might be usable. Pixabay (
Pixabay.com ) is one potential source for legally useable art, even for commercial purposes.

Be careful— not all of Pixabay's images are exactly copyright free. I suspect people upload stuff that violates IP, and Pixabay hasn't yet found the violation.

No one in his circle owns a set of colored pencils or markers, and he can't find anyone in town? There's no one with a graphics program on a computer? Seems a bit unlikely. So what it boils down to is that he'd like a better-looking product than he'd get for free or cheap, and he'd like to get it by using the art of serious professionals without paying the professionals.

I don't know that he'd be sued. I know I wouldn't care to have business dealings with him.

Ask Chat GPT for some sci fi art and use that, avoids all the legal evil.

Ask Chat GPT for some sci fi art and use that, avoids all the legal evil.

It does?

So what happens if he successfully develops the game? Is he then going to go to the image owners to license their IP to use in his game? Is he ready to pay the (probably exorbitant) licensing/royalty fees for their use (if they even allow it)?

My guess is 'no'. Better to make up/use your own art right from the start instead of poking a beast and risk getting eaten… ;-)

OpenAI's current usage policies and terms of use provide the relevant guidance regarding commercial use of content generated by ChatGPT, including images:

Key points:
You own the outputs: According to OpenAI's Terms of Use, as a user (provided you comply with the terms), you own the content you create using ChatGPT, including images. This includes commercial rights.

Responsibility for legality: You are solely responsible for the legality of how you use the outputs. This means you must ensure that any content you generate does not infringe on third-party rights (e.g., trademarks, copyrighted characters, likenesses), and complies with all laws applicable to your intended use.

No guarantee of originality: While the content is generated uniquely for you, OpenAI does not guarantee that the output is free from similarity to existing content. This is especially important in commercial contexts where copyright or trademark conflicts might arise.

No use for deception: You may not use the content in ways that violate OpenAI's usage policies, such as spreading misinformation, generating harmful or misleading content, or violating privacy.

For example:
You can sell T-shirts with art you generated using ChatGPT (or DALL·E).

You can use images in books, games, websites, etc., commercially.

You should not use it to impersonate a known brand or person.

You must not claim that the image was created by a human artist unless it was further modified accordingly.

When in doubt:
If you are planning significant commercial use (e.g., wide distribution, publishing, or monetizing generated art), it's best to:

Conduct a legal review for potential IP conflicts.

Consider stating that the image was "AI-generated using OpenAI tools."

Would you like a short boilerplate disclaimer you could use with your images?

Search the Internet for artists, and find one whose art you like. Then buy some artwork for the project. It is NOT as expensive as many believe.

I worked with a friend on making Dice Towers which he wanted to laser burn artwork onto. I advised him to do the above, and he found artwork he liked, which ran about $75 USD per piece, and he only had to add the artist's signature to each piece, but he could use them any way he saw fit: T-shirts; Dice Tower faces; decorating wooden gaming table artwork on end pieces, on legs, and pull-out drawers; coasters; etc.

If it is a commercial project, and he believes it will sell enough copies to break even, or make a profit, it will be worthwhile. Otherwise…

Take some photos of toy space ships, alien artwork, etc., and modify them using ChatGPT to modify -- there are videos on YT showing how to do it. This will alter them, far more than the 10% often cited regarding modified artwork to pass legal muster (that is not a verified thing, just what I've heard for many years). You can turn them into line art, comic book style artwork, and you can do these successively on the artwork, even reversing it within ChatGPT, which will further alter them from the original. It is quite fascinating to see how the AI alters it.

Avoid doing this with images that feature hands/feet, as AI really falters on these elements -- unless you are creating alien races! Cheers!

I agree with Robert and Craig. Do your own.

martin

link

link

There are no numerical standards for change to create a new work in the law, or in cases of which I am aware.

copyright.gov/fair-use

As a person who has dealt with this all the way back to the 1980s. Scrap the art and use simple line drawings during playtesting. If he is demonstrating the game at multiple shows. Word about use of the artwork is more likely to get back to the owner. Artists are so poorly paid that they fight for every cent. Besides they must defend ownership to keep copyright protection.

I agree with Time Portal. There is actually no need for high quality artwork during playtesting, just as one could playtest a set of figure/miniature rules using unpainted models.

I appreciate all of the responses on this topic, as I'm the person Schogun posted the original topic for.

The intent has always been to use all new art, and two artists have already been consulted regarding it. As all of the original cards and art was set up using Warzone 1st Edition pictures, and Doomtrooper cards, the thought was to keep playtesting with that art, and as the new art was generated it would be subbed in where appropriate.

It sounds like that probably is not a good idea, and as such the old art is being removed and temporary AI art is being subbed in. My preference is to have something on the cards, as opposed to them being blank.

Thanks again for the responses.
Kevin