I love them! But I'm a bit confused by the multiple listed licenses, which license applies to what part of the asset?

I see! Imo you probably don't have to list the license of Stable Diffusion AI itself

@FieraRyan: The artwork isn't licensed under the stable diffusion license, but yes; a link to the AI's license should be listed in the description of any IA-assisted assets posted on OGA... Including MidJourney stuff, really.

See also this conversation: "...there are very specific Terms of Use for the various tools out there. Not all of them are compatible with the open licenses we support. For that reason, I will insist upon any such submission including a link to the specific version of AI tool that was used so that everyone can be confident the allowed usage of output will not get anyone in trouble."

I understand that the AI used and the license that the AI gives to the generated artworks should be listed, but I was talking about the license of the AI's source code itself, since GPL licenses are mostly used for programs and their source codes right? In this case Stable Diffusion is open source, but Midjourney itself is closed-source with no license provided.

...GPL licenses are mostly used for programs and their source codes right?...

@FieraRyan: Correct. GPL makes a terrible art license. It is an option here on OGA for legacy reasons (basically, if you wanted to make your art open source back before creative commons or other open art liceses existed, GPL was the only viable option) and it has very little to do with Stable Diffusion's license. It is snowdrop's choice how this art should be licensed and snowdrop likes CC-BY-SA and GPL. :)

AI used and the license that the AI gives to the generated artworks should be listed, ... but Midjourney itself is closed-source with no license provided.

@FieraRyan: I don't require that submissions link to the AI's code license. I require that submissions link to the AI's Terms of Use. For Stable Diffusion, the Terms of Use happen to be enumerated within its code license. Although MidJourney doesn't list a code license, it does have a Terms of Service page, which outlines how the output artwork is licensed. Include a link there in any midjourney submissions and assert that you are a paying member (as you've already done) since that changes the output license from CC-BY-NC to CC0.

Personally I believe that current layout of the site creates these confusions

@Snowdrop: Agreed. This site is in desperate need of an hoverhaul. Unfortunately, as a free site with no ads, we're not exactly flush with resources to take that on. :/ However, we're open to any volunteers that want to help out! :)

AI assisted art is relatively new, so thank you for all of your patience as we adapt to the legal implications of these new and exciting waters! :)

This submission has been marked as having a potential licensing issue. Hopefully, this is temporary. This does not mean the submitter has done anything wrong or that there is even a licensing issue at all, but there is a potential licensing issue. As mentioned previously in various places on OGA, we said

"...Until that broader discussion [of the legality of AI assisted artwork] progresses closer to some form of conclusion, we'll go with the general consensus. ... [the] general precedent [is currently] that it's fine. If that general consensus changes, so will the decision to host such assets on OGA."

The general consensus is changing now. Changing to what is not yet clear, but there are several ongoing US court cases involving exactly this topic. The court's decision on these cases will inform how OGA hosts assets created with the use of AI assistance. See https://opengameart.org/content/artificial-intelligence-assisted-artwork for more information.

This is NOT any sort of final determination or a permanent flagging of this submission. Regardless of the court's decisions about these tools, there are a lot of factors to take into consideration. Not all submissions will be handled the same way.