So that's a good reason to provide people who have no capacity to create fake images an instant way to do so, while riding on the back of things the owner has no idea how they would actually create if they were asked to do so? Sweet. Let's all steal other people's property, charge for APIs and then take $15 a hit to let scammers use it.
Yes, they'll break a software license and use garbage that uses garbage that uses garbage. Way to draw the line.
I'll be honest, I don't really get your reply. I was merely saying that adding a clause in the license is pretty pointless. The hypothetical user has already decided to break one (or more) law(s), they wouldn't even think twice to break a software license (probably won't even read it).
Your comment sounds like a criticism of the project in general rather than the pointlessness of adding a clause to the license. Personally, I think this is pretty novel, better than the 100's of stable-diffusion-as-a-service things that have popped up lately.
> while riding on the back of things the owner has no idea how they would actually create if they were asked to do so
I mean, everyone builds on top of things they couldn't recreate. If you're a software developer, chances are you couldn't recreate your favorite languages runtime/compiler/whatever, you couldn't recreate your OS, you couldn't recreate the hardware that's running your software. I don't get this criticism at all.
Yes, they'll break a software license and use garbage that uses garbage that uses garbage. Way to draw the line.