Hey there 👋

I’m Jakob Stewart, a digital artist working with NSFW AI tools, and this is the question I get by email more than any other.

Can I sell what I make with these models?

I wrote about this back in 2024 in can you sell AI images.

Every model I used back then has since been replaced, so I sat down and read five licenses line by line.

Same warning as always. I am reading legal documents, not giving legal advice, and I am not a lawyer.

The Flux Contradiction Nobody Explains

Start with Flux dev, because it is the one most of you are running.

Section 2(b) of the license is blunt about the model:

You may only access, use, Distribute, or create Derivatives of the FLUX [dev] Model or Derivatives for Non-Commercial Purposes.

And Section 1(c) defines non-commercial in a way that closes a lot of doors.

It excludes use for revenue-generating activity, use in direct interactions with end users, and training other models for commercial use.

So far this reads like a hard no.

Then you get to Section 2(d) in the same document:

We claim no ownership rights in and to the Outputs. You are solely responsible for the Outputs you generate and their subsequent uses… You may use Output for any purpose (including for commercial purposes), except as expressly prohibited herein.

Read those two clauses together.

The model is non-commercial. The output is commercial.

That is not a typo on my part, because both clauses sit in the same document.

This is where almost every discussion I have seen gets it wrong.

What That Actually Means in Practice

Here is my reading, and it is a reading, not a ruling.

  • Generating images on your own machine and selling them looks allowed by 2(d).
  • Running Flux as a service where customers push the button looks blocked by 1(c), because that is direct interaction with end users.
  • Fine tuning Flux and selling the LoRA looks blocked, since a LoRA is a Derivative.
  • Selling images made with somebody else’s Flux LoRA stays in the same grey area as the base case.

The line is roughly this. Selling pictures is fine. Selling access to the model is not.

If you make money on a Fanvue page with images you generated yourself, you are on the safer side of that line. If you build a website where users type prompts, you are not.

The Clause About Filtering

One more from Flux, Section 2(e), and this one surprised me.

You have to either implement content filtering, or review output before you distribute it.

But read what it is filtering for:

to prevent the creation, display, transmission, generation, or dissemination of unlawful or infringing content

The words are unlawful or infringing. Not adult, not explicit, not NSFW.

I went looking for a clause banning sexual content in this license and there is not one.

Section 4(a)(vii) prohibits unlawful content, and names child sexual abuse material and non-consensual intimate images specifically.

That is a very different thing from banning adult content between consenting adults.

The Other Four

I read these the same way, straight from the license file on each model page.

Wan 2.2 is Apache 2.0.

No revenue cap, no excluded countries, no content clause, nothing about filtering.

It is the cleanest license in this whole category, and that is a large part of why I use it.

MiniMax H3 looks great and hides a trap.

Its grant only covers what it calls the Applicable Territory, and Section I.5 lists the United States, the EU, the UK and Korea as excluded.

Section V.3 extends that to the outputs, including displaying them, which puts an American audience outside the license.

LTX 2.5 carries an acceptable use policy with a section titled “Do Not Generate Sexually Explicit Content”.

It names sexual acts and fetish content directly, so for this audience that one is simply closed.

Hunyuan is the surprise of the group.

Its community license has no clause about sexual content, and the excluded territories are the EU, the UK and Korea.

The United States is allowed, which is the exact opposite of the MiniMax situation.

The Three Things I Now Check

This took me an afternoon and turned into a habit I now repeat for every model.

  • Does the license restrict the model, the output, or both? Flux restricts one and frees the other, and that distinction decides whether you can work.
  • Is there a territory clause? Nobody expects one and two of these five have it.
  • Is there a content clause at all? Two of the five say nothing about adult content, and one bans it outright.

Ten minutes per license. The file is sitting right there on the model page.

What I Could Not Verify

Being honest about the edges of this one.

I did not get a lawyer to confirm any of this.

The Flux tension between 2(b) and 2(d) is exactly the kind of thing that gets settled by lawyers and not by me.

I also did not check the license of individual community LoRAs, which each carry their own terms and often contradict the base model.

That is a much bigger job and probably the next post.

If you are making real money from this, pay a lawyer for one hour. It is cheaper than the alternative.

Want to be updated on tools and tutorials? 👉 Subscribe For Free👈

More tools I have tested live on NSFW AI Tools.