You own your AI headshots in every way that matters for using them, as long as the platform's terms say so: Narkis gives you all rights to every image you generate, commercial use included, and claims none for itself. What nobody gets in the US is a registered copyright in a purely AI-generated image: the U.S. Copyright Office's January 2025 report says prompts alone don't make you the author, and in March 2026 the Supreme Court left that human-authorship rule standing (Thaler v. Perlmutter). For a LinkedIn photo, a team page or a speaker bio, that changes nothing.
What does differ between tools is the fine print: who else gets a licence to your images, and what happens to your selfies. On Narkis your 15 to 20 photos train one model of your face and are used for nothing else, and that model makes up to 200 headshots for $27. Below: where the law stands, the three kinds of terms you'll see, and what each use (LinkedIn, ads, print, resale) needs.
The Legal Landscape in 2026
Copyright law and AI-generated images are still working things out. Here's where the major jurisdictions stand:
United States
The U.S. Copyright Office has been clear on one point: works created entirely by AI, with no meaningful human involvement, cannot be copyrighted. A federal court upheld that in Thaler v. Perlmutter (2023), the D.C. Circuit affirmed in March 2025, and the Supreme Court declined to hear the case in March 2026.
The Office's January 2025 report on copyrightability adds the detail that matters for headshots: prompts alone, however often you revise them, don't make you the author of the output. Creative edits you make to an image afterwards, or a creative arrangement of several images, can be protected, but only your own contribution is.
The practical reality: copyright decides whether you can sue someone for copying an image, not whether you may use it. Your right to use your headshots comes from the platform's terms. And your face is protected separately: most US states recognise a right of publicity, so nobody may use your likeness to sell something without your consent, whether the photo came from a camera or a model.
European Union
The EU takes a different angle through the AI Act. The focus is less on ownership and more on disclosure. If you use AI-generated images in commercial contexts, transparency requirements may apply depending on the context. A headshot on LinkedIn is unlikely to trigger these requirements. A headshot used in advertising might.
Everyone Else
Most jurisdictions haven't addressed AI-generated images specifically. Default copyright principles apply: you likely own the output if you directed the creation. But "likely" isn't "definitely."
What Platform Terms Actually Say
This is where it gets practical. Forget the abstract legal theory. What did you agree to when you clicked "Accept"?
Common Terms You'll See
"You retain ownership of your outputs." This is the good version. Some platforms, including Narkis.ai, grant you full ownership of generated images. You can use them commercially, modify them, distribute them. The platform claims no rights to your outputs.
"You grant us a worldwide, royalty-free license..." This is the version to watch. Some platforms retain a license to use your generated images for training, marketing, or other purposes. You "own" the image, but you've also given the platform permission to use it however they want. Read the scope of this license carefully.
"Outputs may not be used for commercial purposes." Some free-tier or freemium platforms restrict commercial use. If you're putting the headshot on a business website or using it for professional branding, this matters.
What to Check Before Uploading
- Output ownership: Does the platform explicitly state you own the generated images?
- License grants: Have you given the platform rights to your outputs? For what purposes?
- Input photo rights: What happens to the photos you upload? Are they stored? Used for training? Deleted after generation?
- Commercial use: Can you use generated images for any commercial purpose without restriction?
At Narkis.ai, the answers are: yes you own them, no we don't claim rights, your uploads are used only for your generation, and yes to commercial use. Not every platform is this clear. Check what happens to your uploaded photos before you commit.
Practical Scenarios
LinkedIn and Professional Profiles
Using an AI-generated headshot on LinkedIn, your company bio, or similar professional profiles is commercially safe on any platform that grants you output ownership. The test that matters here is likeness, not law: the photo should look like you when people meet you on a call, which is why a model trained on your own photos beats a generic generator.
Company Marketing Materials
If your company wants to use your AI headshot in advertising, brochures, or public marketing, the standard is higher. You need a platform that explicitly grants commercial use rights. At most corporate scales, the legal team will want to see those terms in writing.
Print and Publication
Books, magazines, conference materials. Same principle: you need clear commercial rights. Most quality AI headshot platforms grant these. Free tools and general-purpose generators often don't.
Resale and Distribution
Can you sell AI-generated headshots? Can you put them in a stock photo library? Generally no, unless the platform specifically allows it. Most terms of service prohibit redistribution of outputs as a product.
The Model Training Question
A separate but related concern: are your uploaded selfies being used to train AI models that serve other users?
This varies dramatically by platform. Some platforms explicitly state they delete your uploads after generation. Others retain them for model improvement. A few are ambiguous about it.
For privacy-focused platforms like Narkis.ai, your uploaded photos are used solely for generating your headshots. They aren't fed into a general training pipeline. They aren't shared with third parties.
For platforms that do retain and train on your photos: you've essentially given them your face as training data. The generated outputs might be "yours," but the model that produces them is now partly trained on you. It will generate outputs for other users influenced by your data. Whether that bothers you is a personal call.
What This Means for You
If you're using AI headshots for standard professional purposes like LinkedIn, company website, email signature, or conference bios, the ownership question is practically resolved. Use a platform that grants you output ownership and commercial rights. Use the photos however you need to. Nobody is coming after your LinkedIn headshot.
If you're using AI headshots for broader commercial purposes like advertising, publications, or products, read the terms carefully. Not because AI headshots are legally risky. Getting it right upfront is easier than fixing it later. Platforms differ on what they allow.
And if you're concerned about what happens to the photos you upload, that's a separate and equally important question. The ownership of your outputs matters. The privacy of your inputs matters more. Read more about AI headshot privacy.
