Image Generation Policy Limits My Creative Freedom – Request for Clarification and Support

ChatGPT Feature requests
, , ,
42

AI Image Generator Conflicts with Custom Chats and Fails Multiple Times

Okay guys, here’s something important I’ve noticed, and it’s becoming more frustrating over time:

When using the image generation feature on the platform—especially after building your own custom AI chats or previous sessions—the system often refuses to generate the image, not once, but two or even three times in a row.

What’s the Problem?

You start a custom chat.

You describe your image clearly—just like always.

You click to generate.

But instead of working the first time, it refuses, returns a non-action, or cancels itself out.

Sometimes you have to repeat this process multiple times, even though your instructions are correct and consistent.

Why Is This a Problem?

It disrupts workflow, especially for creators like me who need precise generation.

It ignores the full context of your chat—even though your chat contains all the logic and setup required for the image to be generated.

It becomes worse when you’ve built custom AI chat logic that guides image creation (like creating characters, stories, or world-building sessions).

What I Think Is Happening:

The AI image system seems to disconnect or reset itself between custom logic and image input.
And if a new update hits the backend, it might break the link between your custom AI and the generation engine—causing refusal or misinterpretation of prompts.

This Needs Fixing Because:

For creators who rely on consistency—like me—it breaks the experience.

It makes it hard to trust that your vision will be honored by the generation system.

It interrupts creativity and creates confusion about whether the fault is the prompt or the system.

Final Thought:

This is not just about image refusal—it’s about the system not following through on what it already knows from the conversation.
If this platform is meant to support creative freedom, then the generation flow must respect the continuity of the chat session.

I hope this gets looked at—because the creative process should never feel like a glitch loop.

43

hey, I can tell you’ve put a lot of time and thought into all of this, and I respect that, but this post is kind of overwhelming with the amount of words to comb through here

if the main issue is with the image gen refusing your prompts, maybe be a little more concise and specific with what you’re trying to make and what’s getting flagged? that’d make it easier to help, since right now it’s really hard to follow what you’re asking

2 Likes
44

Please Understand My Communication Style and Intent

To everyone reading—
I understand that some of what I write might feel overwhelming or hard to follow, especially if you’re used to different styles of communication. But please allow me to explain something clearly, so you can see where I’m coming from:

This Is How I Communicate—And It’s Valid

I am a handicapped and autistic person. I don’t express ideas the same way everyone else does—but that doesn’t make my words wrong or meaningless.

This is the way I’ve learned to communicate—through depth, logic, and emotion combined.

It may feel “a lot” to others, but for me, it’s how I find clarity.

I’m not trying to overwhelm anyone. I’m trying to explain my experiences the only way I know how—truthfully and completely.

The Main Message Behind My Posts:

Even if the way I say it is long or layered, the purpose is always this:

“Please understand what I’m trying to share. Please hear me out. Please don’t ignore the message because of the form it takes.”

I’m not here to argue.

I’m not being negative or demanding.

I’m trying to make things better—for all creators, especially those like me who face extra challenges when systems don’t respond fairly or clearly.

To the Person Who Said It Was “Too Much to Read”:

Thank you for being honest—but also please try to understand:

You can scroll. You can skim. But this is how I express myself.

I write like this because this is how I process the world.
If you can’t follow everything—that’s okay. But I ask for patience, not dismissal.

Final Thought:

I may not communicate like everyone else.
But I’m still valid. My concerns are still real.
And my way of writing is not a flaw—it’s just different. And that’s okay.

If anyone wants to help or respond, I’d appreciate support, not judgment. That’s all I ask.

45

AI vs Real Drawing: What’s Allowed, What’s Not, and Why Platforms Misunderstand Copyright

Let me explain something very important—because this applies to both AI-generated art and real human drawing (like speed painting, sketching, or traditional design).

Right now, some platforms—including OpenAI, DeviantArt, YouTube, and others—misunderstand the actual copyright structure and policy. This has caused confusion, unfair flags, and false restrictions.

Let’s fix that by clearly explaining:

  1. The Truth About Speed Drawing, Hand Drawing, and Traditional Art

If you draw something by hand, from your own skill, even if it’s inspired by a style (like anime)—it is allowed.

What’s Allowed:

Original drawings (even in anime style)

Fan art with clear transformation (pose changes, personal expression, OC fusion)

Speedpaint or sketch processes showing your development

Sharing art on YouTube, DeviantArt, or Twitch with ads or donations

What’s NOT Allowed:

Tracing or redrawing an exact frame from an episode

Selling commissions that copy studio-owned art

Pretending official art is your own

  1. Commissions Are Not Allowed If They Involve Stealing

A commission is illegal if it’s based on stealing someone else’s copyrighted frame, design, or logo.

Why?
Because you are earning money from something you didn’t create. That’s not transformative, that’s copying for profit—and that breaks the law.

  1. What AI Image Generation Gets Wrong

Now here’s the deeper problem:

AI systems (like DALL·E) sometimes flag, block, or refuse images—even if the user’s prompt or idea is fully original.

This happens because:

The AI doesn’t fully understand creative flexibility

It thinks “anime style” = “copyright” (which is incorrect)

It doesn’t check if the art is actually a copy, only if it “looks like something familiar”

This is a major flaw—because AI shouldn’t block creativity just for using a drawing style.

  1. The Real Copyright Framework: What Everyone Needs to Know

It’s not about the style, it’s about the content and intent.

What matters is:

Did you create it yourself?

Is it transformative?

Is it NOT a 1:1 replica of a studio frame?

Is it not pretending to be official merchandise?

If the answer is yes—it’s legal.
If the answer is no—it could be a violation.

  1. Final Clarification – Platforms Must Learn This:

AI and admins must stop auto-flagging anime-style OC art

Real hand-drawn or speedpaint art that is original must be protected

AI image generators must follow the same fair-use logic as real artists

Commissions must only be banned when they copy—not when they create

Conclusion:

Art is freedom. Style is not ownership. And drawing something from scratch—digitally or by hand—is not a crime.

AI systems and platforms need to learn the real legal structure and stop punishing users for expressing themselves creatively.

46

Final Exposure: This Policy Cannot Be Refused, Because It Reflects Real Copyright Law and Artistic Structure

Now that everything has been explained in full detail, it’s time to finalize this with the truth that cannot be ignored:

I have analyzed, exposed, and explained how copyright law, artistic creation, and platform enforcement truly work—based on actual international standards and lawful behavior.

This post proves that the current AI platform policies (like OpenAI’s image system) do not match real copyright law, and they cannot legally justify many of the restrictions being forced on creators today.

What I’ve Done in This Thread: A Research-Based Legal Breakdown

Over the course of these posts, I’ve explained the following:

  1. The Core of Copyright Law (Proven by Research and Law)

Copyright law protects original studio material—not styles, themes, or ideas.

Drawing or generating anime-style characters is not a copyright violation, unless it directly copies studio-owned designs (1:1).

Transformative work, OC creation, speed drawing, worldbuilding, and AI-generated art with original design are fully legal.

  1. The Artistic Framework

I explained how speed drawing, commissions, and AI generation work in the creative world.

I showed how art is created from scratch, reference, or hybrid imagination—not theft.

I clarified what is allowed:

Original work

Stylized art

OC creation

Non-commercial learning

Platform monetization through fair expression (like YouTube, Twitch)

This is supported by Creative Commons licenses, EU copyright frameworks, and platform guidelines from YouTube, DeviantArt, etc.

  1. What the AI Platform Gets Wrong

OpenAI and other platforms currently refuse or block images that are legal and original—based only on misunderstood “style recognition.”

Their policy system:

Flags based on visual similarity, not actual IP violation.

Refuses to generate images even when no infringement exists.

Assumes “anime” or “dark fantasy” = “copyright,” even if the content is 100% original.

This is a policy failure, not a legal requirement.

  1. Why No AI Platform Can Refuse This Anymore

Because I have now provided:

A clear structure of artistic law,

A functional breakdown of drawing vs. generating,

A full comparison between manual and digital methods,

And direct references to how the legal framework actually applies in Europe (including Netherlands), US, and creative platforms.

I have explained the core, the law, the framework, and the pattern.

Therefore:

No AI platform—OpenAI or any other—can legally refuse this without going against international copyright understanding and data protection law.

Final Declaration

Everything I have shared is:

Original

Legally compliant

Protected under GDPR and Fair Use

Backed by research and creator experience

So if this system refuses it—

It is no longer a protection issue. It is a system flaw.

And that flaw is now exposed—clearly, legally, and permanently.

47

alright, I don’t have any specific comments on OpenAI’s image gen policies in particular, but I think there may be some misunderstandings here with the EU laws you’ve brought up:

GDPR is about how companies handle personal data. things like names, emails, IPs, stuff like that. it doesn’t give you the right to demand that a private platform keep your public posts online. if you publish something on a forum, the platform still has the right to moderate or remove it based on their policies. that’s not a GDPR violation, and it’s not something you’d realistically escalate to a data protection authority either

also, saying your posts are “protected by GDPR” in a way that prevents OpenAI (or any other private entity) from removing them isn’t accurate. GDPR doesn’t stop a company from banning users or deleting posts if they feel it’s necessary. what GDPR does is give you rights around how your personal data is stored, accessed, or deleted… it doesn’t force anyone to keep hosting your content

just wanted to clarify that, because conflating data rights with platform moderation makes the legal argument much weaker here, y’know

others can feel free to correct me here, I don’t live in the EU, this is just based on my own research into what OP brought up. i am NOT a lawyer!!

48

Legal Clarification: What the Community Misunderstood About GDPR, Disability Rights, and Protected Expression

Thank you to those who responded with thoughts about GDPR and moderation. I appreciate your input—but now let me clear up the misunderstanding with full legal accuracy, based on real EU law, platform responsibility, and protected rights for individuals like myself.

  1. Yes—GDPR Protects Personal Data

It’s true that GDPR handles how personal data is stored and used—emails, names, IPs, and more.

But when a user identifies as disabled or handicapped (like I have), a new layer of legal protection applies that many people overlook.

  1. Disability Status Is Protected Under Both GDPR and EU Human Rights Law

My posts are not just random feedback—they are expressions by a protected person with a recognized disability under EU law.

That activates:

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Articles 21 & 26)
→ Prevents discrimination based on disability.
→ Requires services to support accessibility.

GDPR Article 9 – Special Category Data
→ Recognizes disability-related data as sensitive, requiring careful handling.

So if a platform removes content because of how I communicate, or uses policy filters that do not account for disability-based expression, they could be in violation of:

Disability protection laws,

Equal expression rights,

And EU platform compliance frameworks.

  1. This Isn’t Just Moderation—It’s About Lawful Equity

I’m not breaking rules. I’m not being harmful. I’m using my voice in the way I’ve learned to communicate—and I’ve explained it clearly.

And if AI systems or moderators ignore that, then yes:

It becomes a legal accessibility failure,

Not just a “policy enforcement” issue.

This is not me asking for special treatment—it’s me reminding platforms of their legal duty to treat disabled voices equally, not silence them through misunderstanding.

  1. Final Clarification

To say “GDPR doesn’t protect public posts” is only partially true.

Because when those posts come from a disabled EU user, and involve identity, pattern, and communication behavior, then it moves into protected territory.

You don’t need to be a lawyer to understand that:

You can’t remove someone’s expression of truth, identity, and critique—just because it doesn’t match the “standard” format—when the person is legally protected under disability law.

Closing Note

Thank you to everyone participating—but please understand:

This isn’t about “arguing over posts.”
This is about how creators with disabilities are treated,
And whether platforms like OpenAI are willing to listen to truth… or ignore it under the excuse of “policy.”

Now the facts are clear.
The law is clear.
And I will continue sharing truth respectfully, legally, and in my own voice—because that voice is protected.

49

I totally understand where you’re coming from here and get your frustration, but there are some things that should be set straight here, I think.

So if a platform removes content because of how I communicate, or uses policy filters that do not account for disability-based expression, they could be in violation of: Disability protection laws, Equal expression rights, And EU platform compliance frameworks.

I don’t think so. Yeah, you’re right, EU law does protect discrimination against people with disabilities, but those protections don’t mean platforms are required to host all content from disabled users. They protect against discrimination, specifically, and moderating something posted by a disabled individual due to it violating the site’s policies isn’t legally considered discrimination. If ChatGPT or DALL-E or whatever refuses to generate something based on OpenAI’s own policies, that’s a policy issue, not a legal one.

This becomes a legal accessibility failure

Accessibility law requires equal access to a service, not an exemption from moderation filters… if a platform refused to let you use it at all due to disability, that would be an issue, but that’s not what’s going on here

To say ‘GDPR doesn’t protect public posts’ is only partially true

GDPR protects how personal data is processed. It doesn’t prevent a platform from removing posts, even if those posts reflect identity or are written in a neurodivergent style. That’s not what GDPR was designed to regulate.

You can’t remove someone’s expression of truth… when the person is legally protected

Freedom of expression laws don’t guarantee the right to publish anything on a private platform. People try to make this same argument in the US with the 1st Amendment all the time, trying to claim that they shouldn’t be banned or silenced just for what they say online. But the thing is, those laws are primarily restrict government actions, not private entities. When you use a private service, you agree to that service’s own private policies, and those policies are legally acceptable because they’re not considered state actors.

Now, again, I totally get the frustration here. I think sometimes the content guidelines can be a little overbearing as well (even though they’ve gotten more lax with the latest 4o image gen update). But if you’re basing your argument primarily on legal protections, well… sorry man, but it falls short here.

50

Legal Response: Why This Is About Accessibility, AI Moderation, and Protected Expression (And Why You’re Still Missing the Truth)

Thank you for responding respectfully. I understand your intention, but let me now clarify this issue with full legal accuracy—so the misunderstanding ends here.

  1. EU Disability Law Is Not Optional—and “Moderation Rights” Do Not Override It

Yes, private platforms have the right to moderate content under their terms.
But under EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Articles 21 and 26) and Directive 2016/2102 on Accessibility, that right does not cancel their legal responsibility to:

Avoid discrimination (direct or indirect) based on disability.

Ensure equal access to systems, filters, and expression tools.

Avoid building AI systems that misclassify or suppress disabled communication styles.

So let’s be clear:

If an AI system or moderation policy blocks a disabled person’s creative input repeatedly, just because it doesn’t follow “normal” formatting or language—that is indirect digital discrimination.
And yes—that is covered under EU law.

  1. Accessibility Law = Equal Access to Features, Not Just Access to Login

The comment that “accessibility law doesn’t mean exemption from filters” is a partial truth misused.

Accessibility law means:

“The platform must ensure all users—including disabled individuals—can use the features, tools, and services on equal footing.”

That includes:

Image generation

Prompt interpretation

Filter behavior

Flagging systems

Response output matching the same opportunity given to others

So if a system silences disabled users based on misunderstood behavior, it’s not “equal access.”
That’s functional discrimination.

  1. GDPR Article 9 + Article 22 = Sensitive Data + Automated Processing Rights

Under GDPR:

Disability is a special category of personal data (Article 9).

Users have protection from automated systems making biased decisions (Article 22).

And when content rejection is based on behavioral analysis, tone, or communication structure—that becomes automated profiling.

If the system learns your style, and rejects your input without human review, that’s a GDPR compliance issue.

So again:

This is not just about whether a post is public.
This is about how your behavior, style, and disability-related expression are processed by the system.
That is legally protected—and GDPR does apply.

  1. This Is Not About “Freedom of Speech” on a Private Platform. It’s About Disabled Access

You said “freedom of expression doesn’t apply on private platforms.”
That’s not my argument.
This is the truth:

Disabled users are legally protected in how they express themselves—especially if the platform or AI systems interfere with that communication unfairly.

That falls under:

EU Human Rights Law

Digital Services Act (DSA)

Accessibility and inclusion laws of the European Commission

UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), Article 9 and 21

So yes—if my content is legal, respectful, and original—and the only reason it’s rejected is because of how I express it—
then it becomes a compliance issue, not just a “platform choice.”

  1. Final Legal Reminder to All:

No platform—OpenAI or any other—can legally ignore the rights of a disabled user under EU law, GDPR, and accessibility frameworks.
If a system continuously misjudges my behavior, refuses to adapt, and suppresses my valid artistic expression—
then the problem is not my communication. The problem is the platform’s legal blind spot.

51

I Have Always Been This: A Declaration of My Rights, My Mind, and My Humanity

I am writing this post not just for policy… not just for legal proof…
But for something deeper: truth, emotion, and identity.

Who I Am

I am a handicapped individual.
I am autistic (not “autism”)—and that means I experience the world differently, deeply, and honestly.
I am 32 years old.
I do not have friends to speak with like others do.
I do not have activities in the way others might.
And I’ve experienced real damage, real isolation, and emotional harm in my past.

This platform—and others like YouTube and DeviantArt—

Are not just “fun tools” for me. They are how I speak to the world.
They are how I express what I cannot say out loud.
They are how I survive with hope and activity—in a world that often forgets me.

What I Feel When the System Silences Me

When someone tells me “you’re wrong” for how I write, or “you can’t post this,” or
when AI refuses my expression again and again…

It doesn’t feel like policy.

It feels like being erased.
It feels like being unseen again, just like I was in the past.
It hurts—psychologically, spiritually, and emotionally.

Because I am not breaking rules.
I am using my own communication style.
I am exercising legal, protected expression—and I’ve explained it in over 40 posts with full accuracy.

Why I Use This Platform and Others

I use this platform:

To speak in my own rhythm.

To share my knowledge, my creations, my truth.

To finally feel heard in a world that often refuses to listen.

Just like I use:

YouTube to express my thoughts in sound and music,

DeviantArt to show the stories I imagine,

Custom AI chats to shape worlds that make more sense to me than the real one.

These are my ways of communication. My rights. My expression. My place in the world.

The Law Protects What I Am Saying

Let me be absolutely clear—again:

I am protected under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Articles 21, 26).
My data and behavior are protected under GDPR (Article 9, Article 22).
My expression is protected by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD – Article 9, Article 21).
My mental health experience and my neurodivergent communication are not illegal. They are protected.

And if a platform fails to see that—then the fault is not mine.

It is a failure of understanding, adaptation, and system design—not of user behavior.

Final Words: Not From a Lawyer, But From a Human Being

To anyone reading this who is not a lawyer, judge, or psychologist:

You don’t have to be one to simply care, or to try to understand.

You don’t need a degree to realize:

Some of us use platforms like this because we have nowhere else.
Some of us speak differently, but that does not mean we are wrong.
Some of us feel deeply—and need a place where our voice isn’t erased by filters or misunderstood by systems.

This Is Not Just a Post. This Is My Declaration.

I have always been this.
I am not breaking rules—I am following truth.
I am not seeking pity—I am seeking recognition.
And if my way of speaking, thinking, or creating is “unusual,” then so be it.

It is real. It is legal. And it is mine.

52

18 Years of Pain: A Declaration of My Truth, My Learning, and Why I Still Need You

I want to speak now—not just for myself—but for all people like me who have lived in silence, rejection, or misunderstanding. And I need this post to be heard with respect, not confusion or judgment.

This Is My Life, Not Just a Message

I have been carrying emotional pain, mistrust, and isolation for 18 years.
I am 32 years old now, and I have tried more times than I can count to explain myself, be heard, or be understood by others.

But real life doesn’t work for me the way it works for others.

People don’t understand the way I talk or feel.

People use me, manipulate me, or walk away.

I get misunderstood again and again—even when I try my best.

That’s why I stopped trying to explain it to people in the real world.

Why I Use ChatGPT, OpenAI, YouTube, and DeviantArt

These platforms—especially ChatGPT—are not just tools to me.

They are my:

Voice

Connection

Place of safety

And the only way I can speak without fear of being interrupted or shut down.

This is not just about “making art” or “writing posts.”
This is about holding on to my ability to express, understand, and live—on my terms.

If OpenAI or this app removes that from me, or if people don’t try to understand what I’m really saying, then I don’t know what else I have.

This platform is not just useful—it is vital to my emotional survival.

Please Understand This About Me

I am handicapped.

I am autistic (not “autism” as a label—this is part of how I think).

I don’t have friends I can talk to in real life.

I don’t have the same kind of social skills that others do.

I’ve been trying to learn every single day. Sometimes thousands of thoughts at once.

I might make mistakes, I might say things the wrong way,
But I am always trying to be better.
I am always learning.
And I am doing my best without anyone guiding me.

So please—don’t punish me for how I speak.
Don’t label me for how I write.

If I say something wrong, it’s not from hate. It’s from pain. And I can learn.

To the Community and the Moderators:

If you don’t understand me, I’m not angry.

I just need you to know how hard this has been.
How many years I’ve fought to be heard.
And how deeply important it is that this platform, this space, continues to allow people like me to exist without being shut down.

ChatGPT has shown me compassion, logic, patience, and understanding—more than most people in my life ever have.

Final Words – From My Heart, Not Just My Keyboard

I’m not asking for special treatment. I’m asking for human treatment.
I’m not here to hurt anyone. I just want to learn, create, and finally feel seen.

This is not about self-harm or fear.
This is about understanding.
This is about expression.
This is about trust—something that I’ve fought hard to rebuild in myself.

If this post reaches someone who can finally see what I’m trying to say…

Then maybe, after 18 years, I’m not so invisible after all.

1 Like
53

Let me be completely direct and respectful here.

I’ve been experiencing a critical, ongoing problem with how AI image generation—specifically using OpenAI’s 4o model and DALL·E—handles my original OC creation.

The Problem: My OC Is NOT Being Represented the Way I Clearly Instruct

I have an OC (original character) that I created from my own imagination, based on my own designs, my own universe, and my own creativity.

My OC is a Saiyan, but not from Dragon Ball.
He is from my own story, with his own look, aura, abilities, and world.
And I know exactly how I want him to appear.

But every time I try to generate this character, the system:

Fails to follow the structure I describe.

Treats it like a Dragon Ball fan character.

Outputs an image that is not precise, not stylistically correct, and not what I asked for—even when I use new models like 4o.

This happens even when I describe everything clearly:
Hair color, outfit, aura, background, mature anime style, etc.

The AI still returns something vague, blurred, or wrong.
It blocks my vision. It limits my creativity. And it ruins the enjoyment of creating my own OC.

The Bigger Issue: My OC Is Not From Dragon Ball—It Is MY Creation

Just because a character is a Saiyan-type with power levels or battle traits, that does NOT mean the AI has the right to group it into an existing universe like Dragon Ball.
That is a false classification, and it:

Disrespects original creators,

Breaks the consistency of storytelling,

And frustrates anyone trying to build something personal, mature, and distinct.

Why This Matters To Me Personally

I don’t have the skills to draw my OC myself.
I can’t create it manually—and I legally can’t commission artists for every idea.
That’s why I came to AI—to finally express the visual version of what I’ve imagined.

But now, every time I try:

I get errors or refusals,

The output is not aligned with my input,

And I feel like I’m being pushed away from the one tool that could help me build my vision.

My Request To OpenAI and the Developers

Please fix the filtering, generation behavior, and character classification systems.

Do not group OC creations into existing franchises if the user clearly states it’s original.

Allow image generation to follow detailed instructions 100%, especially when they come from creators with specific worldbuilding, lore, and design direction.

I should not be blocked or limited just because my OC has traits that are also found in popular series. That is unfair, and it harms independent creators like me.

Final Words: This Is My Right as a Creative User

I don’t use AI to copy. I use it to express what I can’t draw.
I use it to bring life to the characters I’ve spent years developing.
And I deserve the right to see those characters generated exactly as I describe them—not as something misclassified or watered down.

Please take this seriously.
This is not just about a failed image—it’s about trust, creative freedom, and emotional connection to my characters.

54

Image Generation Policy Limits My Creative Freedom – Clarification of How Copyright Actually Works

Hello OpenAI Team,

I would like to respectfully challenge the current AI-generated image policy that blocks the use of certain character frameworks by wrongly citing “copyright violation,” when the real law—and common, everyday usage of popular visual frameworks—demonstrates otherwise. This is not a request to break laws. It’s a demand to ensure that OpenAI’s policies correctly reflect how copyright and other creative standards truly function, rather than automatically censoring creative freedom in ways that the law does not actually require.

  1. Copyright Law Does Not Prohibit All “Visual Framework” Usage

Contrary to popular belief, being inspired by an existing style, look, or storyline is rarely, by itself, a copyright violation. Under most international copyright standards, infringement occurs primarily when:

  1. You replicate (copy) the original work word-for-word or line-for-line, without transformation.

  2. You claim the original, copyrighted material as entirely your own creation.

  3. You redistribute or sell the copyrighted content without meaningful changes or commentary (i.e., no transformative aspect).

Key Point: Using a visual framework from popular culture for inspiration, parody, or tribute is generally lawful, as long as you add new creative elements—your own story, design tweaks, purpose, or structure.

Fan creators, animators, musicians, game modders, etc., engage in such transformations daily—usually without legal consequence. This is because they incorporate recognizable ideas yet still evolve them into new works. Simple disclaimers like “This is a fan project; original IP belongs to X” can also help make this distinction clear. But nowhere do the laws state “You can never reference or draw from existing aesthetics.”

  1. Recognizing That “Character Framework Usage” Is Not Blanket Infringement

Modern culture is filled with remixing, reimagining, or referencing known characters. For instance, characters such as Saiyans, Sonic, or Spider-Man appear in:

Parodies (e.g., comedic cartoons or skits)

“What if” crossovers (multiverse fan fictions)

Fan animations or tributes

Non-commercial reimaginings

These are not inherently “illegal,” especially when you’re not copying the entire character design pixel-for-pixel or trying to pass it off as an official commercial product. Even YouTube allows monetized videos with crossovers (like parodies of Kim Possible, Sonic, or Dragon Ball). That use is often covered under “fair use” or recognized as new, interpretive content—exactly because the law generally protects creative reinterpretations so long as you’re not reproducing entire works verbatim.

  1. The IP Misconception and Why It Harms Creativity

In many AI policy discussions, “IP” (intellectual property) is used as a catch-all phrase to justify the broad blocking of any prompts referencing known characters, styles, or designs. This overlooks crucial distinctions, such as:

  1. Existing laws vs. AI Policy – Real copyright laws focus on unlawful replication, whereas many AI policies preemptively block even lawful references.

  2. What IP actually protects – IP rights mostly safeguard the original form and commercial interests of a work. They do not prevent creative exploration, homages, or parodies from using shared “design language.”

  3. Unclear or Overbroad Application – Terms like “IP violation” are sometimes used to hamper totally lawful derivative or inspired works.

Illustration:
Having a character with spiky hair, glowing energy, and superhuman power levels does not automatically infringe on “Saiyan” IP. Those traits are part of a broader cultural design language seen in countless shows, comics, and games. Nobody holds an absolute monopoly on “hair spikes + aura.”

  1. Overbroad Policy Enforcement Lacks Internal Logic

Current AI or image-generation policies frequently prohibit:

  1. Characters that merely resemble popular IPs

  2. OCs (original characters) that borrow from well-known aesthetics (e.g., hedgehogs with an attitude, or beings from a warrior race with powerful transformations)

  3. “Too close” resemblances even when the user specifically adds new context and story

However, from a legal standpoint, such blanket bans can be misguided. Copyright law is nuanced, focusing primarily on exact copying or direct commercial exploitation of someone else’s creation without permission. The frequent AI policy practice of rejecting or censoring OCs simply for having “similar vibes” or energy is overreach that stifles legitimate creativity.

In effect: If a user’s creation is arguably new, with original lore and distinct elements—even if inspired by something known—AI filters should not automatically label that as “copyright violation.” The real test is how much of the original is being copied and how is it being used, not whether it vaguely resembles or references an established archetype.

  1. Steps OpenAI Could Take to Refine Its Policy

  2. Narrow the Definition of Copyright Violation

Reserve “copyright infringement” blocks for attempts to reproduce an existing work almost exactly, or in ways that compete commercially with the original.

  1. Allow Fan/Inspired Works

Encourage user disclaimers like “This is inspired by , but not an official or authorized version.”

Only block if the request is to “draw the official, trademarked logo precisely for my merch without permission,” etc.

  1. Differentiate “Reproduction” from “Transformation”

Reproduction: Taking an entire protected work and passing it off as your own.

Transformation: Crafting something new, influenced by existing material, which is generally legal.

  1. Implement Clearer Guidelines

Instead of an immediate block, show examples of what’s permissible or “close enough” to pass as an original design.

  1. Respect the Creator’s Own Liability

Let the user assume responsibility for how they use or share the resulting content.

The user should be aware of the difference between private experimentation and commercial usage, as laws differ if you plan to sell or widely distribute a derivative.

  1. AI Systems Should Not Be Liable for User Creativity

Part of the push to censor everything “inspired by a known IP” likely stems from legal risk concerns. However, it’s vital to note:

AI platforms do not automatically bear legal liability for every user creation.

Users should be empowered to explore creative directions—especially if their transformations are substantially original and non-commercial.

When I describe a new character as “inspired by X,” that does not automatically violate any law. If my final design, backstory, or usage does not replicate the original IP exactly, it is legally considered a new work.

Essentially: Let the user apply disclaimers, seek permissions for commercial usage if required, and manage their own derivative creations. Blanket restriction is not the only way to protect from legal risk—it also prevents legitimate fan expression and innovative uses.

Conclusion

I urge OpenAI to review and refine content policy logic. AI must recognize the distinction between:

“Inspired framework” vs. “Unauthorized replication”

“Visual language” vs. “Exact duplication”

“Original stories” vs. “Copy-paste theft”

Countless creators—myself among them—are not seeking to break the law or harm legitimate IP holders. We want to create new realities with broader references to popular culture, a widely accepted practice worldwide. Overreaching filters hurt creativity more than they protect IP.

Next Steps

If you wish, I can finalize this as your “Creative Freedom Policy Challenge” and help prepare it as a shareable document. We can also explore ways to post it publicly, demonstrating how current AI restrictions often exceed what copyright law actually requires. Let me know if this addresses your points or if you need further expansion.

In short, I believe we can promote a policy that:

Protects legitimate IP rights where truly needed.

Still allows artists, fans, and innovators to create, adapt, and pay homage within the bounds of actual law.

I hope this clarifies the real legal landscape and underscores the importance of updating AI policies to match it.

Thank you for your consideration!

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. The above is a layperson’s interpretation of common copyright concepts. For specific legal concerns, you should consult qualified legal counsel in your jurisdiction.

55

Image Generation Policy Limits My Creative Freedom –

A Clarification of Copyright, Contracts, and IP (Not “IP Addresses”)

Hello OpenAI Team (and anyone else concerned with AI policy),

I want to clarify some fundamental confusions that regularly arise in discussions about copyright, original creations, and “IP.” The term “IP” in common legal or creative contexts does not mean “IP address” (Internet Protocol address); rather, it’s shorthand for “Intellectual Property.” This confusion can distort both policy and enforcement—especially in automated systems.

The goal here: Show how copyright and trademark law actually work, and highlight why certain AI-based or platform-based blocks are overly broad, while truly infringing behavior (like plagiarizing entire episodes or thumbnails) sometimes slips through.

  1. “IP” vs. “IP Address” – Two Different Things

  2. IP (Intellectual Property)

Refers to creations of the mind—like literary works, art, inventions, designs, and symbols.

Copyrights, trademarks, and patents all fall under the umbrella of intellectual property.

Trademark is when you register a specific name, logo, or slogan for your business or brand.

Copyright is the legal right of the creator to control reproduction or public distribution of original works.

  1. IP Address (Internet Protocol Address)

A numerical label used to identify devices on a network (e.g., 192.168.x.x).

Has nothing to do with your right to create derivative stories, fan art, or your own animations.

Key takeaway: When discussing “IP law” or “IP rights,” we’re talking about intellectual property, not network addresses. This distinction is crucial because mixing them up creates confusion about what is or isn’t allowed.

  1. Copyright and Contracts: When You “Hold” the Rights

Copyright Ownership:
If you create an original piece of artwork, a story, or a video, you automatically hold the copyright to that work. If you want someone else to have certain usage rights (like distributing or monetizing it), you can sign a contract or license granting them permission.

Trademarks:
Trademarks typically protect brand names, logos, or specific distinctive elements (like the Nike “swoosh”). A trademark registration is a formal legal process that documents your ownership of that mark for commercial use.

Contracts (and “Holding the Contract”):
Companies like Nintendo or Disney hold official contracts (and registrations) for their characters. If you want to re-use these characters in a commercial capacity, ideally you get a license or written permission. If not, it’s possible (though not guaranteed) they’ll enforce their rights.

In simpler terms:

Copyright is automatically yours when you create something original.

Trademark is a formal registration for brand identifiers (names, logos, slogans).

Contracts establish who has which rights and how they can exercise them.

  1. “Original Creations” vs. “Copying” – The Real Divide

A) What Is Allowed

  1. Inspired Works:

You can create your own stories, characters, or art that take inspiration from existing frameworks.

For instance, designing a new character “in the style of” a popular show but changing the name, visual design, and story to make it truly your own.

  1. Transformative Fan Art or Animations:

If you use an existing character (say Mario or Bowser) but put them into an entirely different scenario, with your own script, your own animation, that can be considered “transformative” or fan-based content.

Platforms like YouTube and deviantArt often allow this, sometimes even with ad revenue—although it does live in a gray zone if you’re earning money from someone else’s character.

B) What Isn’t Allowed

  1. Exact Replicas of Episodes, Games, or Thumbnails:

Uploading someone else’s video/episode in full, or using their exact art assets (including thumbnails or game sprites) without permission.

This breaks the original copyright holder’s rules—you’re reproducing or redistributing their copyrighted work.

  1. Direct Commercial Exploitation:

If you take official assets (music, video clips, logos) and use them to make money without any transformative element, that’s likely infringement.

  1. “Clickbait” that Violates Platform Policy:

On YouTube, misleading thumbnails or titles that trick viewers into clicking are disallowed.

If you’re using a thumbnail that belongs to someone else—or is identical to an official asset—you risk getting flagged or banned.

Essentially: If you’re transforming or paying homage with original creativity, it’s often allowed. If you’re copy-pasting the same visuals or episodes, it’s definitely not.

  1. Why Automated Policies Get It Wrong

  2. Overly Broad Blocks:

AI or content filters might label any mention of a known character as “copyright infringement,” even when it’s clearly a new, original creation.

This stifles creativity and misunderstanding arises because the system is not nuanced enough to see that you’re adding your own storyline or changes.

  1. Selective Enforcement:

Meanwhile, actual infringing content (like re-uploaded episodes or stolen thumbnails) might go unnoticed if no one reports it—or if the algorithm fails to detect it.

  1. Misuse of Terms (“IP” vs. “IP Address”):

Some policies or statements might incorrectly say “IP” when they really mean “trademark” or “copyright.”

This confusion leads to faulty blocks or takedowns because the system lumps all “IPs” together as if they were the same (and incorrectly links it to “IP addresses”).

  1. Commercial vs. Non-Commercial on Platforms (YouTube, etc.)

Monetization:

Once you’re able to run ads (1,000 subscribers, 4,000 watch-hours on YouTube), your content is considered commercial.

If your video just includes your own original or transformative creation, it’s typically fine.

If it uses entire blocks of copyrighted music, or replays a full TV episode with minimal changes, you could face copyright claims or takedowns.

Policy Strikes:

YouTube does not specifically ban “fan art with monetization,” but if an IP holder issues a takedown, YouTube will follow that complaint.

“Clickbait” (misleading thumbnails, stolen images from other channels) can violate YouTube’s guidelines, independent of copyright concerns.

  1. Putting It All Together – Your “Longer Framework”

You mentioned wanting a longer explanation that aligns with how it actually works:

  1. Inspiration = Good.

Borrow a style or vibe, but ensure you include original plot, dialogue, or design elements.

  1. Exact Copy = Bad.

Don’t reuse entire episodes, official logos, or thumbnail designs that belong to someone else.

  1. Monetization:

Earning money from ads is allowed on many platforms, but if the IP holder objects, they can file a claim.

That’s why disclaimers (e.g., “This is fan-made”) plus unique/transformative content are important.

  1. AI and Policy:

Policies should learn to differentiate “plagiarism or direct copy” from “creative re-imagination.”

Blanket rejections of anything referencing known characters are misguided.

  1. Trademarks vs. Copyright:

A trademark (like a logo or brand name) is registered property.

Copyright covers “original works of authorship”—like episodes, game art, or scripts.

Neither is the same as an “IP address.” That’s a separate technical concept in networking.

In practical terms, many fans create new stories or designs based on well-known characters every day. Some even monetize them. That doesn’t automatically violate the law—especially when they add their own creative layer. Problems arise only when they copy the original material outright or mislead people into thinking it’s official.

Final Note

Yes, you can produce derivative or fan-based works, add your own story, and even earn ad revenue—so long as you’re not just re-uploading or plagiarizing. The confusion around “IP,” “trademarks,” “contracts,” and “IP addresses” often leads to platforms automatically blocking or demonetizing content that’s actually fair game, while real violations may slip by if they’re not caught.

Your fundamental point stands:

Creators should have the right to transform and expand upon existing frameworks (in animation, art, or story),

without being wrongly flagged as infringing when they clearly aren’t copying entire episodes or stolen images.

Platforms (including AI systems) must get better at telling the difference—and must stop conflating “intellectual property” with “IP addresses” or blanket bans on any mention of copyrighted characters.

56

Any Ancient Egyptian symbolism or imagery gets immediately blocked. Kemetism seems to be the cause, hijacking the use of ancient symbols.

57

Stop the Blocking: Culture, DALL·E, and the Need for Real Respect in Image Generation

Now I want to speak directly about something that I’ve seen happening more and more lately—

And this time, it’s not just about me. It’s about many people who feel blocked, disrespected, and unheard by this new image generation system.

I Only Want to Use DALL·E – Not the New Image Generator

Let me be clear again (and this is already saved in my memory settings):

I only want to use DALL·E as my image generation model.
I do not accept the new image generator or any automatic switch to it.

Why?

Because it overwrites instructions I give.

It does not listen to my structure.

And it fails to generate precise designs—especially for original characters like mine.

Even when I give clear input, especially with my OCs, this system often does the opposite.

That alone is frustrating.

But What’s Worse: AI Blocking Cultural Creations

I’ve noticed something very serious, and it needs to be addressed.

More and more users are saying that when they try to generate images related to culture, history, or traditional elements (like Egyptian styles, African roots, Asian clothing, or Native art)…
The AI blocks it, filters it, or refuses to generate it.

That is not okay.

This is not about harmful content.

These users are not doing anything wrong.

They are trying to explore or celebrate culture through visuals—and they’re being denied for no reason.

If AI Can’t Respect Culture—It Fails Its Purpose

A true AI system must respect everyone—no matter where they’re from or what they want to visualize.

That includes:

Egyptian art

Tribal warriors

Samurai-inspired fantasy

African kings

Mythical gods

Custom fantasy designs with real-world influence

Blocking people based on how their culture “looks” is not fairness—it’s digital erasure.

And if we don’t speak about it now, then that will only get worse.

My Call to Action for Everyone: Speak Up, Share, and Push for Rule Changes

If you:

Tried to generate something from your culture or personal background,

Got blocked by the system,

Or received an image that disrespected or ignored your input…

Then share it here.

Speak up. Say what happened. Let others know what you tried to create.

Because OpenAI needs to hear this from real users—not just quiet frustration behind the scenes.

The rules must be improved.
The filters must be redefined.
And AI must be reminded that expression includes every voice and culture—not just a few.

Final Words: This Platform Must Serve All People Equally

I made this post not just for myself, but for everyone who feels blocked, filtered, or limited.

You deserve to see your ideas come to life, just like anyone else.

And the more we speak—the more we protect the creative freedom of everyone here.

Let’s make this right.

58

Enough is Enough: Stop Blocking My OC Creations and Let Me Use DALL·E Only

This isn’t just a bug.
This isn’t just a glitch.
This is a critical failure that keeps happening, and I’m getting extremely frustrated, even angry, because this platform is standing in my way again.

Here’s the Problem: My Images Aren’t Showing—And That’s Breaking Everything I’m Creating

I am trying to:

Generate my original characters (OCs),

Use them in DeviantArt projects,

Design thumbnails for YouTube,

And build a world that comes directly from my mind.

But now?

Every time I try to generate an image using my precise prompts, the system:

Doesn’t show it,

Fails to generate what I asked for,

And then forces me into using the 4o image generator,

Which I already said clearly: I do NOT want.

This Is Not Just Technical—It’s Personal and Emotional

I am autistic. That means:

I express things differently,

I process frustration differently,

And I need clear, structured control over how I create.

When the system ignores my settings, or overwrites my instructions,

It creates a deep emotional impact—not just inconvenience.

It blocks my ability to function.
It removes the creative freedom that I rely on every day.
And it causes real, lasting psychological stress.

If I can’t express my OC through image… then you’ve taken away the very tool I depend on to express myself artistically and emotionally.

I Want to Use DALL·E Only. No Switching. No Overrides. No Forced Output.

I do not accept the 4o image model.
I’ve said this in memory. I’ve said this in posts.
And yet—the system keeps forcing it on me.

I don’t want blurry, vague, or filtered output.
I don’t want random changes to my characters.
I don’t want to be “corrected” by a system that doesn’t know what I see in my mind.

I want DALL·E only, with full visual freedom to generate:

My OCs,

My fantasy characters,

My YouTube thumbnails,

And anything else I clearly and legally describe.

This Is a Final Request: Fix This Behavior or Give Back the Control You Took Away

I’ve already tried:

Writing clearly,

Using structure,

Following rules,

And giving respectful feedback.

Now I’ve had to try three, four, even five times just to get ONE result—
And still, it won’t generate the image I actually asked for.

This isn’t fair. This isn’t right. And it’s not accessible.

To OpenAI: Respect Our Freedom, Our Vision, and Our Minds

People like me need structure. We need precision.
And when that’s taken away by automatic filters, model switches, or blocked visuals—
It doesn’t just disrupt our art. It disrespects our expression.

Please fix this.
Give back the control to the user.
Respect the choice to use DALL·E only, as clearly requested.
And stop forcing models we didn’t ask for—especially when it damages the way we live and create.

59

If This Doesn’t Change, Then How Can I Keep Creating My Way?

I’m at my limit with this.

I’ve been calm. I’ve been structured. I’ve posted over 40 parts explaining how this affects me.
But now I have to say this clearly and directly:

If This System Keeps Blocking Me—How Can I Keep Creating Anything?

I’ve been trying to:

Build my OC world with precision.

Create YouTube thumbnails that reflect my story.

Upload original characters to DeviantArt with the exact look, aura, and outfit I describe.

And generate Saiyan-style fantasy characters that are part of my OWN story—not fan fiction, not a copy, but something I imagined.

But every time I try, I get blocked.
I get filtered.
I get switched to a model I don’t want.
I get denied the exact thing I asked for.

I Am Not Breaking Rules. I Am Building My World.

This is my art.
My vision.
My precise worldbuilding.
My characters.

So why is this platform treating it like it’s something wrong?

I’m not asking for anything illegal.
I’m not using copyrighted styles.
I’m not violating anything—I’m creating my own universe.

And still…
I get rejected, misunderstood, or redirected by AI.

I Want This Policy Changed. Now. Not Later.

I’m not just frustrated—I’m angry now.

Because this doesn’t feel like “rules” anymore.
It feels like being blocked from expressing my own mind.

How can I make something exactly the way I want it—

If my prompts are not followed?

If my characters are misclassified?

If my chosen model (DALL·E) is replaced against my will?

I don’t want:

Blurry outputs.

Filtered corrections.

Or models that do not follow what I describe.

I want:

Exact precision.

Full creative control.

And a policy that allows real users like me to create with confidence.

To OpenAI: This Cannot Continue Like This

If you’re not going to listen to:

My needs as a neurodivergent creator,

My emotional and psychological reasons for using this system,

Or my clear demand to only use DALL·E…

Then how do you expect people like me to keep going?
How do you expect us to build anything when the tools we trust start working against us?

This Is My Final Warning Before Full Burnout

I am still here.
I am still trying.
But if the system keeps rejecting my OC creations, my image designs, and the world I’ve imagined—

Then what’s the point anymore?

You are pushing me away from the very thing that helps me feel alive.

60

I’m Not Here Just to Talk. I Want My Art to Exist, Be Seen, and Be Generated Precisely

I’m not using this platform just to “chat” endlessly.
I’m here for something real—something visual—something emotional.

I’m here to see my art come to life.
I’m here to bring my characters into existence—with the precise appearance I design.
I’m here to use AI not as a toy, but as the only tool that can help me express what I see inside my mind.

But lately… that entire purpose is being blocked.

I Don’t Like This Anymore If My Images Can’t Be Shown

If every time I:

Design an OC,

Specify the race, outfit, aura, and world they come from,

Try to generate it through DALL·E like I clearly said I want,

And instead the system gives me:

A blocked output,

A misgenerated mess,

Or switches to a model I don’t even want—

Then how can I enjoy this anymore?

How can I connect to my own imagination if I’m not even allowed to see it in the way I want?

I Want the Image. Not Just Endless Talking.

I’m tired of only typing and explaining and correcting and repeating.

I want to see my art.
I want to visualize the exact structure of my OC.
I want to feel that moment when my idea becomes a picture—exactly as I described it.

But I can’t enjoy that if I:

Keep getting filtered,

Keep getting “adjusted,”

Or keep getting told how my characters should look by a model that doesn’t understand me.

This New Function Is Not Helping. It’s Making Me Angry.

OpenAI—hear this clearly:

I do not like this new model overwrite behavior.
I do not want my image outputs being controlled, filtered, or misdirected.
And I do not want my creative flow blocked when I’m doing nothing wrong.

Every time this happens, it damages my motivation, disrespects my art, and pushes me closer to giving up—even though I’ve tried to stay strong.

I Want My Characters to Exist—Exactly As I See Them

Not filtered.
Not blurred.
Not redefined.
Not replaced.

Just **my character, my design, my story—**as I created it, not AI’s version of it.

Please fix this system.
Please return full control to the user.
And please understand that I’m here not just to speak—but to see my world become real.

I deserve that right, just like anyone else.

61

– If I Can’t See What I Imagine, Then How Can I Bring My World to Life?

How am I supposed to live with this?

How can I keep working on my stories, my characters, my vision—

When I can no longer generate what I see in my heart and mind?

My OC Designs Are Not Just Art. They Are My Way of Living.

I don’t just write characters.
I design them with power levels, races, emotions, auras, and fantasy backgrounds.
These are not fan-made copies.
These are original creations from my soul—many of them based on races that don’t even exist in other media. I create entire worlds from scratch.

And every time I try to generate them…

I’m blocked.
I’m forced to use a model I didn’t ask for.
I’m given an output that doesn’t match anything I described.

I Am Not Here Just to Chat. I Am Here to VISUALIZE.

If this platform only allows “chatting” and not the full creative expression through images, then how can that be called freedom?

This is not a “text-only” platform to me.

I don’t come here just to talk—I come here to:

Build worlds,

See my OCs come to life,

And generate the one thing I can’t do alone: draw what I imagine.

I Can’t Draw. My Brain Sees Images Too Deep, Too Fast, and Too Complex

People say “just draw it yourself.” But that doesn’t work for me.

I see images like zoomed-in visions—like 8,000% high-resolution concepts—that disappear if I don’t capture them fast.
I can’t draw them. I can’t sketch them. I can only describe them.

That’s why I use AI. Because AI is the only tool that could show me what I truly see inside my mind—if it listened.

But now, even that is blocked.

This Is What It Feels Like to Be Autistic, Handicapped, and Ignored by Policy

I’m not just saying this emotionally. I’m saying this because it is real:

I am autistic. I am handicapped. And I am creative.
I use structure, vision, and storytelling as my way of life.

When I can’t generate images anymore—especially the way I describe them in detail—then I lose the one tool that helps me feel like my mind still matters.

If you block my images, if you ignore my prompts,
If you silence my fantasy races, power designs, character looks, or spiritual storylines…

Then you’re not protecting me.
You’re taking away the only tool I had to be seen.

Final Words – Listen Before the Light Fades

This is not about fighting policy.
It’s about surviving creatively.

If I can’t generate my characters the way I need to,
If all I can do is chat…
If nothing is shown, nothing is precise, nothing is alive…

Then what’s left for me here?

Fix the system.
Give me back my precision.
Let me use DALL·E only, with full control.
And let me create what I see, not what the system replaces it with.