I've been trying to figure out what the rules are for covers. I totally get the "romance novel" cover concept. I'm not sure if you can go beyond that. Are there any guidelines? I looked all over smashwords but there isn't anything I saw that covered this. I thought I'd ask here since there are established authors etc.
Are there rules on smashwords for how explicit a cover can be?
- Thread starter Sanzas
- Start date
Ada Stuart
Author
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2005
- Posts
- 159
Yes, they do have some guidelines here: https://www.smashwords.com/about/supportfaq#covers
But basically, it boils down to:
- jpg format
- no 3D covers
- file size can not be more than 15mb
- cover size should be around 1600 * 2560 pixels
- make sure you own the right to use the images. Don't just copy a picture online and use it because you might regret that a lot. I buy mine from Freepik or Depositphotos, but you can find some good free photos on those sites as well. Just make sure that you read all the Licence information that comes with the photo. Usually you are allowed to only buy a standard licence as long as you sell below 500 000 copies (which is hardly a problem, lol)
But basically, it boils down to:
- jpg format
- no 3D covers
- file size can not be more than 15mb
- cover size should be around 1600 * 2560 pixels
- make sure you own the right to use the images. Don't just copy a picture online and use it because you might regret that a lot. I buy mine from Freepik or Depositphotos, but you can find some good free photos on those sites as well. Just make sure that you read all the Licence information that comes with the photo. Usually you are allowed to only buy a standard licence as long as you sell below 500 000 copies (which is hardly a problem, lol)
lovecraft68
Bad Doggie
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2009
- Posts
- 45,688
Understand there's two sets of standards here when it comes to explicit. Selling just in the smashwords store has more wiggle room, but to be approved through premium(to see via SW on Barnes and Noble, Apple, Kobo and others) is stricter.
For example for SW only a thong or lingerie/bikini that shows a lot of a woman's ass is okay for SW as is bare breasts with the woman's hands, arms or something covering the nipples. But neither of those things will get through premium. Also a couple who appear to be engaged in sex, as in pretty much naked and very "o faced" is a fail in premium.
The image you posted won't make it with her ass bare like that.
For example for SW only a thong or lingerie/bikini that shows a lot of a woman's ass is okay for SW as is bare breasts with the woman's hands, arms or something covering the nipples. But neither of those things will get through premium. Also a couple who appear to be engaged in sex, as in pretty much naked and very "o faced" is a fail in premium.
The image you posted won't make it with her ass bare like that.
Bramblethorn
Sleep-deprived
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2012
- Posts
- 18,335
At least some of that background looks like it might be AI-generated. If it is, you probably don't own the copyright. That doesn't necessarily stop you from using it as a cover (couldn't see anything in SW's rules about this) but it means anybody else could swipe it and use it on their own work.
That's correct--although I plan to do substantial modification of it. In any event, yeah: no one owns AI images (not sure about derivative works using them as a basis).
KeithD
Virgin
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2012
- Posts
- 29,626
It's not a cover size. It won't translate as this in a Smashwords display. To the statement that no one owns an AI image, I'll bet someone owns this background photo. Maybe you, if you took the photo. The various elements of a composite photo can be/most likely are owned and copyrighted.
alohadave
Doing better
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2019
- Posts
- 3,318
Currently anything AI generated is not eligible for copyright protection. It's not owned by anyone, and cannot be copyrighted. Essentially, anything created by an AI is public domain, and anyone can use it.
How that applies to derivative works, I can't say, you'd need to consult a copyright lawyer in your jurisdiction.
I know that Dall-E specifically notes the lack of copyright when you generate, and makes generated images available to download.
Bramblethorn
Sleep-deprived
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2012
- Posts
- 18,335
I suspect even a copyright lawyer is only going to be able to give an educated guess at this point. Presumably if there's enough human creative input on top of the AI-generated material, it eventually reaches a point where it can be considered a creative work protected by copyright, but until we have some precedents it's hard to know where a court would draw the line.
It's not a completely new question - David Bowie and other artists have used "cut-up" techniques including computer generation to create random lyrics, and some of the same questions about human authorship arise there. But I don't know if there have been any precedent-setting cases around those.
Bramblethorn
Sleep-deprived
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2012
- Posts
- 18,335
There is no "background photo". That's the AI-generated part. There are several tells if one knows what to look for.
This is correct. It's also not a collage in the human sense (cut outs of existing images combined to make a new image). The image space (the spread of all possible images) is produced by ingesting and training a massive set of existing images--but those buildings or whatever never existed as themselves in any of the works.
