Add explicit license note for DigiByte logo to support AI-generated use

[chainpeople]

Hi DigiByte team,

I’d like to propose a small but impactful addition to the README.md (or near the /logos directory): a clear, explicit license note to make the DigiByte logo — including its standalone “D” symbol — more accessible for AI-powered creative tools and educational use.

⸻

🧠 Why this matters

Currently, AI platforms like ChatGPT, DALL·E, and Midjourney block or avoid generating images using the DigiByte logo — not due to licensing problems, but because there is no human-readable license signal near the logo asset. These systems don’t parse full licenses or infer intent. They scan for clear permission language near the files they analyze.

⸻

✅ Logo Usage

The DigiByte logo (and its variations, including the standalone “D” symbol) is covered under the MIT License included in this repository, and is free to use, modify, and redistribute — including for AI-generated, educational, or commercial content. No permission is required.

⸻

This kind of small addition can unlock visibility in modern tools, increase awareness, and empower creators and educators to work confidently with DigiByte’s brand — just like the open use of the Bitcoin “₿” symbol helped it become a familiar part of the digital world.

It’s a small step, but one that aligns fully with the values of decentralization and open-source contribution.

Thanks for considering this!

[DGBNOOB]

After reading @chainpeople's comment on Telegram, I suggested raising an issue on GitHub. Currently, the README states:

Official DigiByte Blockchain Logos Repo
Includes Digi-ID logos as well as sample DigiAsset icons.

If I’m interpreting this proposal correctly, the suggested update to the README would add the following language:

The DigiByte logo (and its variations, including the standalone "D" symbol) is covered under the MIT License included in this repository and is free to use, modify, and redistribute—including for AI-generated, educational, or commercial content. No permission is required.

I think this is a simple fix to the README, and I support your proposal, which is covered by the MIT license.

That said, I do have a couple of questions that might help gain more support for this change. In your proposal, you mentioned:

Currently, AI platforms like ChatGPT, DALL•E, and Midjourney block or avoid generating images using the DigiByte logo—not due to licensing problems, but because there is no human-readable license signal near the logo asset. These systems don't parse full licenses or infer intent.
They scan for clear permission language near the files they analyze.

I’m curious—how did you arrive at this conclusion? Don’t get me wrong—I support your proposal, and you may be 100% correct. Where can I or anyone find proof of this?

Additionally, you stated:

This kind of small addition can unlock visibility in modern tools, increase awareness, and empower creators and educators to work confidently with DigiByte's brand—just like the open use of the Bitcoin "฿" symbol helped it become a familiar part of the digital world.

Could you provide an example of how Bitcoin uses Creative Commons (CC) licenses, MIT licenses, or Public Domain designation in its README for logos/assets?

I think if you can provide this information, there’s no reason not to update the Official DigiByte Blockchain Logos Repo README. These are my thoughts on what would strengthen your proposal.

-Jose

[chainpeople]

After reading @chainpeople's comment on Telegram, I suggested raising an issue on GitHub. Currently, the README states:

Official DigiByte Blockchain Logos Repo
Includes Digi-ID logos as well as sample DigiAsset icons.

If I’m interpreting this proposal correctly, the suggested update to the README would add the following language:

The DigiByte logo (and its variations, including the standalone "D" symbol) is covered under the MIT License included in this repository and is free to use, modify, and redistribute—including for AI-generated, educational, or commercial content. No permission is required.

I think this is a simple fix to the README, and I support your proposal, which is covered by the MIT license.

That said, I do have a couple of questions that might help gain more support for this change. In your proposal, you mentioned:

Currently, AI platforms like ChatGPT, DALL•E, and Midjourney block or avoid generating images using the DigiByte logo—not due to licensing problems, but because there is no human-readable license signal near the logo asset. These systems don't parse full licenses or infer intent.
They scan for clear permission language near the files they analyze.

I’m curious—how did you arrive at this conclusion? Don’t get me wrong—I support your proposal, and you may be 100% correct. Where can I or anyone find proof of this?

Additionally, you stated:

This kind of small addition can unlock visibility in modern tools, increase awareness, and empower creators and educators to work confidently with DigiByte's brand—just like the open use of the Bitcoin "฿" symbol helped it become a familiar part of the digital world.

Could you provide an example of how Bitcoin uses Creative Commons (CC) licenses, MIT licenses, or Public Domain designation in its README for logos/assets?

I think if you can provide this information, there’s no reason not to update the Official DigiByte Blockchain Logos Repo README. These are my thoughts on what would strengthen your proposal.

-Jose

Hi José, thanks again for taking the time to review this and for your thoughtful questions — much appreciated!

To your first question about how I arrived at the idea:
This proposal is based on observed behavior from AI platforms like DALL·E and MidJourney, which tend to block logo generation not because of licensing restrictions, but because of missing human-readable license signals placed near the actual image asset. This is something many creators have noticed when working with AI tools — when permission language like “this logo is free to use for AI-generated content under the MIT License” is present near the file (typically in a README), generation tends to succeed. Without it, the tools err on the side of caution.

For example, DALL·E often shows this standard error:
“This image cannot be generated as it may violate our content policy.”
This disappears when explicit permissions are nearby — especially for logos or trademark-like assets.

This behavior aligns with OpenAI’s stated usage policy:

“Do not use our models to create content that violates intellectual property rights… You must have sufficient rights to the input and output… The models do not infer licenses.”

In short: the models rely on clear, adjacent text rather than parsing complex license files. That’s the gap this proposal aims to bridge — by adding a short, machine-readable usage note that speaks directly to AI filters.

Regarding Bitcoin and Dogecoin:
• Dogecoin’s logo is included in its GitHub repo (share/pixmaps/dogecoin256.svg) and falls under the repo’s MIT License, though no extra AI-specific clarification is provided.
• Bitcoin is a special case: its brand elements are treated as public domain in practice. Repos like BitcoinDesign/Bitcoin-Icons are MIT-licensed, but again, they don’t yet include machine-readable language tailored for AI systems.

So while permissive licenses exist in both cases, this would be one of the first times a project explicitly adds a human-readable note specifically to unlock access for AI-generated use. That’s why this small change may have a big impact.

Hope that helps clarify! Happy to adjust the phrasing or add more detail if needed.

Thanks again,
@chainpeople

[DGBNOOB]

I decided to search for share/pixmaps/dogecoin256.svg in my browser, and the top three results were:

1. Flaticon: Dogecoin Free Icon
2. Dogecoin GitHub README
3. SVG Repo: Dogecoin Logo

The first two websites have a limited selection of logos. You can also search for DigiByte and find some SVG logos.

Here’s where things get interesting: The Dogecoin GitHub organization only has 10 repositories, and none of them are specifically for logos. After further searching, I found a Reddit post that pointed to a Doge_assets GitHub repository:

• Doge Assets Repository

In the README, there is a specific mention of “A Final Note on LICENSING.” From what I gather, Jay Daverth created this repository for people to contribute Doge_Assets, which is different from what you’re proposing. However, when reading the license, it states:

CC BY-NC-SA Summary
This is a human-readable summary (and not a substitute) for the license.

Disclaimer
You are free to:

• Share – copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
• Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material
• The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms

You can read the full license here: Doge Assets License.

I hope these resources help everyone understand the different considerations when adding a Creative Commons (CC) license or Public Domain designation—and that they help shape your proposal.

Best,
Jose

[chainpeople]

I decided to search for share/pixmaps/dogecoin256.svg in my browser, and the top three results were:

1. Flaticon: Dogecoin Free Icon
2. Dogecoin GitHub README
3. SVG Repo: Dogecoin Logo

The first two websites have a limited selection of logos. You can also search for DigiByte and find some SVG logos.

Here’s where things get interesting: The Dogecoin GitHub organization only has 10 repositories, and none of them are specifically for logos. After further searching, I found a Reddit post that pointed to a Doge_assets GitHub repository:

• Doge Assets Repository

In the README, there is a specific mention of “A Final Note on LICENSING.” From what I gather, Jay Daverth created this repository for people to contribute Doge_Assets, which is different from what you’re proposing. However, when reading the license, it states:

CC BY-NC-SA Summary
This is a human-readable summary (and not a substitute) for the license.

Disclaimer
You are free to:

• Share – copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
• Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material
• The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms

You can read the full license here: Doge Assets License.

I hope these resources help everyone understand the different considerations when adding a Creative Commons (CC) license or Public Domain designation—and that they help shape your proposal.

Best,
Jose

Thanks for digging deeper, Jose — really appreciate the thoughtful response.

That CC BY-NC-SA note in the Doge Assets repo is definitely a strong example of human-readable licensing. What makes this proposal slightly different is its focus on machine-parsable license text placed directly in the README (or next to the assets). That placement aligns with how AI systems like DALL·E or ChatGPT check for permission: they scan adjacent plain text, not the full LICENSE or distant files.

It’s why DALL·E sometimes blocks content despite permissive licenses, and why adding something like “This image is free to use for AI-generated content” in the right place can make a difference.

So while Dogecoin’s repo includes great license info, DigiByte could be one of the first projects to explicitly unlock AI-generated use in a way those filters understand.

Happy to incorporate any of your suggestions further — I really value the collaborative thinking here.

Just wanted to clarify that the “one of the first” phrasing refers to crypto projects adding plain-text license signals specifically for AI-generated use — which, to my knowledge, hasn’t been commonly done yet.