Output ownership across ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Midjourney, DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, ElevenLabs, Suno, Copilot, and the rest is governed by 14 different sets of provider terms — each with carve-outs for free vs paid, training-data rights, indemnification, and revenue thresholds. I read those terms, map them to your product, and tell you exactly where the risk lives.
Flat fees. Direct work with me. No hourly surprises unless you specifically request the custom-drafting tier.
One AI tool, one product, one clear answer on what you can and can't do with the outputs.
Your full AI stack reviewed. Provider terms mapped. License clauses drafted for your product. Risk memo with citations.
Bespoke work: AI clauses for MSAs, model-output license riders, vendor pushback, output-rights schedules.
Flat-fee, direct work with me. Open any panel for the detail.
The single-provider ToS and output-rights review is a $575 flat fee you can pay now through the PayPal button. The AI Output Rights Audit is a $1,500 flat fee; for the audit, send your stack first and I confirm scope and the payment link before any work begins.
No hourly surprises on either flat-fee tier. Only the custom-drafting tier is hourly, and that one carries a written estimate with a ceiling before any hours are billed.
Drafts in 2 to 3 business days, even for complex agreements. I work weekends when a matter needs it and it is engaged.
The single-provider review comes back as a written ownership-and-risk memo with a tier comparison. The audit delivers the provider ToS map, the drafted license clauses for your product, and the risk memo, with one round of revisions on the clauses.
After you pay (or after I confirm the audit scope), send the provider terms for the tools you use, your subscription tiers, and a one-paragraph description of how you generate and use the output (internal, commercial, redistribution).
I confirm the scope, draft the memo or clauses, and send a written walkthrough. The audit includes one round of revisions on the drafted clauses.
The flat fee covers the defined scope: one provider and one product for the $575 review, or your full AI stack (typically 3 to 6 providers) plus drafted downstream license clauses for the $1,500 audit, with the revisions stated on each tier.
Work beyond that defined scope, vendor negotiation, AI schedules to an MSA, model-output license riders, or extra providers, is handled through the hourly custom-drafting tier, a $240 Written Attorney Consultation, or a re-quote, so the flat fee stays predictable.
A scannable breakdown of every artifact you receive. Each one is written for your specific stack and product, not a template.
Every primary AI tool you use, mapped to ownership terms, training-data carve-outs, indemnification, and tier-specific differences. Cited to current provider language as of the engagement date.
Plain-English risk assessment for your specific use case. Active litigation flagged: Bartz v. Anthropic, NYT v. OpenAI, Disney/Universal v. Midjourney, BMG v. Anthropic, and the music industry suits.
Drafted clauses you can drop into your ToS, MSA, or platform terms. Survives upstream provider terms. Aligned with how you actually deploy AI — embedded feature, agency deliverable, or fine-tuned model.
Recommendations on C2PA watermarking, content credentials, attribution, and disclosures — tied to FTC guidance and platform requirements (Runway, Pika, Canva, Adobe).
Stable Diffusion's $1M revenue rule, Midjourney's pro-tier requirements, Suno's distribution tiers — flagged so you know when your business outgrows its current AI tooling and needs to switch tiers or providers.
One mid-engagement (after the ToS map is done) to align on scope. One delivery call to walk through the memo and revised clauses.
If any of the scenarios below describe your business, the audit pays for itself the moment a client, vendor, or insurer asks "do you actually have the rights to that?"
Your client buys a campaign or video. They ask whether your imagery is copyrightable and whether they can sublicense it. The answer depends on which tier you use and whether you added human authorship.
Workspace integration, training opt-out, Vertex AI indemnification, and free-tier carve-outs make this question different from a creator. The audit maps it to your agency's actual deployment.
Provider terms cascade. Your platform terms have to clear ownership, indemnify your users (or not), and survive the provider's training-data carve-outs. This is the audit's core sweet spot.
Stable Diffusion's RAIL-M license, Llama's commercial restrictions, the $1M threshold, and downstream user obligations all need to be reconciled with how you ship the artifact.
BMG v. Anthropic and the UMG/Concord lawsuits make audio AI the highest-risk modality right now. Distribution rights, sample clearance, and voice-clone consent all sit in the same memo.
A four-column snapshot. The full 14-platform comparison covers every variant in detail.
Send me a one-paragraph description of how you use AI in your business. I'll tell you whether the $575 review is enough or whether the audit makes more sense.
Email me directlyBefore you decide between the $575 review and the $1,500 audit, run the AI Output Rights Risk Calculator. Composite score plus a four-part breakdown (ToS exposure, ownership clarity, customer disclosure, cross-jurisdiction) and an estimated dollar exposure tied to your AI revenue.
Each answer resolves in one sentence before the expansion. Click any question for the full answer.
If you are mapping who owns your AI output and where vendor training terms bite, this shows how I draft those boundaries. Flip a tool's account type or training posture in the AI vendor matrix and watch its rating react in real time, work the confidentiality and citation-verification checklists, sort the risk register, and click any clause of the locked AI Use Policy to comment or suggest an edit in track changes.
Open the live demo workroom How I build these for firmsReal questions from the Terms.Law forum where founders, freelancers, and tenants worked through situations like yours.
Email me a one-paragraph description of your AI stack and product. I'll send back a scope confirmation and the PayPal invoice within one business day.
Email me to start →Disclaimer. The information on this page is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this page or contacting me does not create an attorney-client relationship. AI-output-rights law is evolving rapidly and the analysis provided in any engagement is current as of the engagement date. Sergei Tokmakov is licensed in California (CA Bar #279869); AI output-rights matters that don't require state-specific litigation are handled nationwide. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.