AI tools whose free tier can't be monetized at all

Terms restrict use to personal/non-commercial or internal business purpose and prohibit any commercial exploitation of Content without written permission; no free-tier commercial grant exists.

Free output is licensed "solely for personal, non-commercial, and internal evaluation purposes" (Terms §4), monetizing it on YouTube or in client work is a direct license breach. Commercial use exists only on paid tiers.

Decisive factor. The free tier's Free Remix License is explicitly personal, non-commercial, non-profit only; the license page also labels the $0 plan 'Free Non-Commercial.' Commercial monetization is only permitted where 'expressly permitted by your license type,' i.e. the paid Pro 'Commercial' tier and up. Primary-confirmed => L4.

Free tier is explicitly personal, non-commercial only; commercial use requires a paid subscription. Pricing page also shows "Commercial Use" not included for Free.

Free tier is explicitly personal, non-commercial use only. Commercial use requires a paid plan.

Commercial use requires a paid license; the free account grants no license to download or use songs, so the free tier is preview/eval only, L4.

Free tier is explicitly personal, non-commercial use only. The terms also state you shall not distribute free videos for revenue.

Commercial rights are presented as a benefit of paid subscriptions. The free tier is a 1000-word trial with no commercial-use grant attached, so free output cannot be monetized.

Decisive. Free output is personal / non-commercial only, exactly the L4 definition. Confirmed three ways: the licensing FAQ above; the pricing page which lists the Free plan as 'Non-commercial use only'; and the binding Terms 3.4(c) ('use the Services or Output for commercial purposes, unless permitted to do so under Section 4.9') plus 4.9(a) ('Customer ... can only use the Outputs for commercial purposes if the Outputs were produced during an active Subscription Term under Customer's paid subscription allowing for the commercial use'). A faceless-YouTube creator monetizing free clips is squarely prohibited.

There is no free tier to monetize at all. Commercial use requires a paid Personal plan ($299/yr), which then covers orgs under $1M. Level 4 reflects that the free path yields no usable commercial output.

The Studio Free card is listed verbatim with 'No commercial usage rights' (commercial usage rights appear only on the Starter and Creator cards), so the free license affirmatively denies commercial use -> L4. There is an apparent contradiction worth surfacing: the Studio Terms contain a BLANKET, plan-agnostic grant, 'Provided you have the necessary intellectual property rights in the Content you Generate with our Services, you may use this Generated Content for commercial purposes.' That grant does NOT rescue the free tier, because the main Terms condition off-platform resale/distribution on holding the paid product license: 'generating audio for resale or public distribution without the proper commercial license of Speechify Studio... may result in immediate suspension.' The pricing page allocates that 'proper commercial license' only to paid tiers, so the free tier lacks it and monetizing free output is a breach. (Main Terms s4.4, 'The Services, with the exception of Speechify Voice Over Studio, are not intended for your commercial use,' is NOT used here as support because it expressly carves out Studio, the product under review; the L4 basis is the pricing-page plan-level denial plus the resale-license clause.) Trivially unlocked on the ~$19/mo Starter tier.

The Free plan grants only a Non-Commercial License and the pricing page states 'No monetization' outright. The EULA reinforces this: 'Licensee shall use the Free plan in order to evaluate whether the paid offerings are suitable for them or not.' Free is evaluation/non-commercial only, so L4.

THE decisive factor. Pollo's own FAQ (on pollo.ai) states free-tier output is non-commercial: a free user is 'not allowed to use your AI videos for commercial purposes.' A monetized YouTube video or paid client deliverable is commercial use by definition, so monetizing free-tier Pollo output is a direct breach => L4 (free output is non-commercial/personal/evaluation only). Note the nuance: the BINDING Terms and Conditions (effective April 30, 2026) actually grant the user ownership of generated content and contain NO tier-based commercial restriction; the non-commercial gate is stated in Pollo's first-party marketing/help FAQ rather than the legal document. Scored L4 (not unclear) because it is an unambiguous, repeated, official Pollo declaration, but flagged in unclearFlags because the controlling Terms and the FAQ are not perfectly aligned. commercialUse L4 floors the band at Risky; combined with freeGate L3 the override raises the band to Not recommended.

Binding Terms of Use, Annex A §4.2 (Ownership and Use of Output). Free output is restricted to personal/non-commercial use = L4 (free non-commercial/eval only). The Annex states it 'will take precedence in the event of a conflict,' overriding the pricing-page marketing checkmark that suggests commercial use is allowed on free. commercialUse L4 floors the band to Risky.

Decisive. The commercial, monetization and social-publishing license is granted only on paid plans (License Agreement 5.1), and the pricing page's Free-plan card lists 'Non-commercial use' as a feature. The Free tier is non-commercial/eval only => L4.

Decisive. The free tier is a 14-day trial licensed for non-commercial use only (EULA Section 3.1). A creator monetizing the output is operating outside the license entirely. Section 20.2 reinforces this even for the cheaper paid Lite plan: 'Paying Users subscribed to the Lite Plan will be able to use the Software and/or Animations for non-commercial use only.' L4, free output is non-commercial/evaluation only.

Free tier is explicitly personal and non-commercial only; a monetized channel is commercial use, so free outputs are not licensed for it.

Free plan cannot be monetized at all. Commercial use requires a paid commercial/business license. Level 4 for the free tier.

Decisive factor. Hedra's own pages restrict commercial use to PAID plans only. The image-generator FAQ is even more explicit: 'All images created on paid plans include full commercial usage rights. Free plan images are non-commercial only.' Free output is non-commercial/personal only -> L4. Primary official-statement on hedra.com, not third-party. Triggers floor Risky; combined with freeGate L3 -> Not recommended.

Free/Basic tier is explicitly non-commercial only; commercial use rights for new songs are gated behind paid Pro/Premier plans.

Free AI output is explicitly limited to personal use, not commercially licensed for a monetized channel. L4. Triggers the commercialUse-L4 floor to Risky.

Free tier is explicitly non-commercial. Commercial rights begin only on the Creator plan. Quote is reconstructed from the terms; verify exact wording before publishing.

DECISIVE, re-anchored to live sources. NOTE: the prior draft's pricing-page quote ('For personal projects only. Cannot be used for business, marketing, or paid work.') is NO LONGER present, the pricing page was updated; it now simply lists 'Personal use license' on Free and 'Commercial use license' only from Standard up. Replaced with the live ToS §2.1 free-tier restriction (verbatim above) plus ToS §1.5 'Personal Use means any use of the Platform for personal or household purposes and which is not Commercial Use' and §1.1 'Commercial Use means any use of the Platform for direct or indirect commercial or business purposes or direct or indirect monetary compensation.' The live pricing-page FAQ reinforces this: 'Your usage should be strictly non-commercial and not affiliated with any business-oriented objectives.' Free output is non-commercial/personal-only = L4. A monetized YouTube channel or client work is squarely prohibited on the Free tier. Confirmed verbatim on the tool's OWN primary pages (ToS + pricing FAQ).

Free-tier Outputs are non-commercial only; commercial use is unlocked solely by a paid subscription. Reinforced by §1.7 ('you may not use or exploit the Services for any commercial purpose') and §4 ('solely for your personal, non-commercial use'). The Mochi-1 blog's 'personal and commercial use' line refers to the separately-licensed open weights (self-host), NOT this hosted free tier, so it cannot lower this level.

Free tier = personal, non-commercial only; Terms also state 'you will not monetize, make commercial use of ... any of Your Outputs ... (unless commercial use is expressly permitted by your subscription tier).' Commercial use is NOT on free; it unlocks cheaply at Pro $5/mo, so L4 (free non-commercial, unlocked cheap paid).

Free plan card explicitly lists "No commercial use"; commercial rights unlock only on paid Creator ($9.99/mo) plan. L4.

Terms 2.1.b restricts the free account to personal, non-commercial use. The help center confirms commercial use requires a paid (Pro/Max) plan, so monetizing free-tier output is a license breach, the worst tier for this factor.

The last directly-quotable Riffusion terms restrict free output to non-commercial use, so monetizing it is a breach (worst tier). Note: riffusion.com/terms now 301-redirects to the Google-gated flowmusic.app, so the current Google-era clause could not be re-confirmed verbatim; the quote is the last primary version captured.

DECISIVE. PixVerse's binding ToS caps ALL output at non-commercial use by default, not just free output. A faceless-YouTube creator monetizing free-tier clips is using output commercially, which the ToS prohibits without a separate commercial-use license. Crucially, the ToS does NOT grant commercial rights via any paid plan; it requires 'separate authorization or a commercial-use license from the relevant rights holders.' L4 (output is non-commercial/evaluation only). The platform 'Trending Inspo'/template materials are even more restricted: 'Platform Creative Materials are made available for non-commercial, in-Platform creative use only.' Override: commercialUse L4 floors band at Risky.

There is Midjourney has no standing free tier (free trials are intermittent and usually disabled). com, and a paid subscription is required to generate anything. Commercial use is therefore unavailable on free and unlocked only on paid plans (cheapest $10/mo Basic).

Free tier is explicitly personal/non-commercial only; commercial rights exist only on paid plans.

The consumer Services (Maya/Miles demo + app) prohibit all commercial use. This factor scores the consumer product a creator would actually click. The open CSM-1B model is Apache-2.0 and commercially usable, but that is a separate self-hosted artifact, not the Service.

Decisive factor. ElevenLabs' Terms of Service (Last Updated 31 March 2026, §1 Use of Services) restrict every Free User to non-commercial use of the Services and any Output. A monetized YouTube video, client work, or any ad-supported content is commercial use by definition, so monetizing free-tier audio is a direct breach. The same clause grants Paid Users commercial use. This is the riskiest level and floors the band at Risky.

DECISIVE. The binding Terms of Service (Last updated March 21st, 2024) limit the entire service grant to PERSONAL, NON-COMMERCIAL purposes, with no free-vs-paid distinction anywhere in the document. That means even paid use is, on the face of the Terms, non-commercial. A monetized faceless YouTube channel or paid client work is commercial use and is not granted. Crayo's pricing-page FAQ markets the opposite ('Yes. You fully own the rights to all videos. We use custom recorded gameplay to ensure originality.') but owning your output is NOT a license to use the service commercially, and a marketing FAQ does not override the binding TOS. This corrects the existing review, which wrongly claimed 'There's no separate non-commercial clause.' L4 → floors the band at Risky.

Terms' license table lists the Free/Unpaid category Commercial Use as "Prohibited" and grants Personal Use only to natural persons. Hard non-commercial free tier.

In the pricing comparison table the 'Commercial usage rights' row shows an X (cross-out SVG, path M15 9L9 15M9 9L15 15) under the free Trial column and a checkmark (path M7.5 12L10.5 15L16.5 9) under Starter and all paid plans. Commercial use is a paid-only feature; the free trial is preview/evaluation only. L4.

The Free plan card lists “Non-commercial use” as a feature; commercial rights begin on the Creator plan (“Royalty-free license”). So free output cannot be used in a monetized video, the decisive L4.

No free tier exists at all, so commercial use on the free tier is impossible. Commercial rights only attach to paid videos. Rated worst risk for the free-tier angle because there is nothing free to monetize.

Pika's FAQ states free (Basic) and Standard output "can't use your content for commercial purposes"; commercial use begins only on Pro/Fancy. Monetizing free output is a direct breach, the riskiest level, matching our full Pika review.

Terms grant the app license strictly for personal and non-commercial purposes, directly blocks monetized free-tier use. Verified verbatim 2026-06-23.

Free account commercial use is explicitly forbidden by Narakeet's own copyright page.

Free tier is explicitly non-commercial per the ToS; commercial use is excluded without a paid plan or credits. Verified verbatim on remove.bg/tos 2026-06-23.

THE decisive factor. The Dreamina ToS (Bytedance Pte. Ltd., last updated Jan 22, 2026) frames the entire service as 'private, non-commercial use' for ALL users, not as a free-tier-only limit. It is reinforced twice: Sec 6 prohibits 'use the Services to advertise or perform any commercial solicitation', and Sec 7 prohibits 'access or use the Services or any content therein for any commercial or unauthorized purposes.' No primary clause anywhere grants commercial use on a paid plan (the CapCut commercial-license-agreement page is 404; paid-unlock claims are third-party only). Because the primary terms affirmatively restrict commercial use across the board with no primary paid-unlock, this is L4 (free output is non-commercial/personal only), not L3. A faceless monetized channel cannot rely on free Dreamina output. Override: commercialUse L4 => floor Risky.

The Terms' Free Tier clause overrides the general 'use Output for any purpose' grant: free-tier output is non-commercial only. A monetized YouTube channel is commercial use, so the free tier cannot be monetized. Commercial use unlocks on the paid Starter plan ($10/mo).

Both the pricing page FREE column ('Non-commercial use' / 'No royalty-free license') and Playground's own April 2026 blog state free output is personal-use only, so monetizing it is a license breach. Pro ($12/mo annual) adds the commercial license.

Cannot be confirmed for a FREE tier because there is no free tier and no consumer Sora product anymore. OpenAI's general Terms of Use (live, HTTP 200, confirmed 2026-06-16, still in force for any Output) plainly grant commercial use of output, verbatim: 'you (a) retain your ownership rights in Input and (b) own the Output. We hereby assign to you all our right, title, and interest, if any, in and to Output.', so the LICENSE never prohibited commercial use. But the specific question this factor asks ('does the free license permit monetizing FREE output?') is unanswerable: as of OpenAI's own help center 'The Sora web and app experiences were discontinued on April 26, 2026,' so no free output can be generated to monetize. Per the integrity rule, an unconfirmable free-tier commercial permission is set 'unclear' (not guessed), which forces the overall band to Unclear. This is the honest verdict: you cannot monetize a free tier that no longer exists.

Third-party sources report free-tier output is commercial-use-with-attribution, but Udio's commercial grant could not be confirmed on a fetchable primary page (terms-of-service is a JavaScript-gated SPA returning no license text). Per integrity rules a safe/commercial level requires the tool's own primary source, so this is marked unclear. It is also effectively academic: downloads are disabled, so no asset can be exported for commercial use anyway.

Terms assert global ownership of generated audio, but explicit 'Commercial use' / 'Broadcasting Rights' language is attached to paid tiers, not the Free plan. No primary text grants free-tier commercial use.

Terms clause 5.5 conditions the commercial license on 'full payment of fees', which excludes free/trial output. But the pricing comparison matrix marks the Free plan with a 'Full commercial license' check ('Enjoy full rights to all the videos you create - no attribution required'). Two primary sources directly contradict each other on whether free-tier output is commercially licensed, so scored unclear (weight*0.5). Triggers the Unclear band override.

AutoShorts Terms and FAQ are fully client-side (JS) rendered and could not be confirmed from a primary source (terms/license/pricing) via static fetch or WebFetch; the FAQ appears to permit commercial use, but with no verifiable primary-source clause this is left unclear rather than asserted safe (ممنوع الغلط).

The official viggle.ai terms-of-use and pricing pages return HTTP 403 (JS-gated), so no verbatim commercial-use clause for the free tier could be confirmed from the primary source. Secondary reports conflict on whether free is commercially licensed. Marked unclear rather than guessed; the practical blocker (watermark plus likeness risk) is captured in other factors.

ToS grants a license that does not include any resale or commercial use of the App or its contents; no explicit grant for commercial use of generated avatar output.

Third-party summaries say free users keep ownership and may use content commercially, but gamma.app/terms returned HTTP 403 (verified 2026-06-23) so we have no verbatim primary quote. Per integrity rule, cannot certify a safe level without the tool's own source. Marked unclear.

Could not load xAI's terms (403 on 2026-06-23) to confirm any free-tier commercial-use grant. Third-party summaries reference 'User Content' ownership but do not certify free commercial rights. No primary quote available.

Clipdrop's Terms of Use page is login/JS-gated; no verbatim commercial-use clause for the free tier could be retrieved (verified by fetch 2026-06-23). Third-party reviews claim commercial use is allowed, but non-primary sources cannot certify a safe level. Pro is separately marketed as granting 'full commercial rights,' implying free is not the intended commercial path.

ToS is client-side rendered and not readable from a primary source; commercial-use rights unconfirmed and additionally bound by underlying model licenses.

Terms of Use cover acceptable use and IP restrictions but never explicitly grant or deny commercial use of generated outputs.

The license that permits monetization is, per Beatoven's own homepage, "delivered directly to your inbox with every download," and "Pay per track or subscribe for additional download minutes" ties downloads to payment. So whether FREE-tier output can be downloaded and licensed for monetization is not confirmable from any resolving Beatoven page (only third-party sources claim free = no download). Decisive factor unconfirmed.

DECISIVE FACTOR, UNCLEAR (evidence:null). Klap's Terms of Service (last updated 25/07/2024), Privacy Policy and DPA are entirely silent on commercial use of generated output: there is NO affirmative grant of commercial/monetization rights and NO restriction. The ToS only places input-rights burden on the user (§4) and disclaims warranties (§7), nothing about what you may do with the output. The supportive 'your original content / ready to publish / Shorts Fund eligible' language lives ONLY on Klap's marketing/tool landing pages (e.g. /tools/youtube-to-shorts), which are help/marketing surfaces, not terms/license/eula/official-statement. Integrity rule: a SAFE level (0/1) requires the tool's OWN primary source affirmatively granting commercial use, and a marketing SEO page cannot be laundered as 'official-statement' to clear that gate. No primary grant exists, so per the override commercialUse=unclear and the overall band becomes Unclear. Honest read: re-cutting your own footage is practically low-risk, but it is NOT contractually granted.

Binding Terms §5.1 limit the Service license to 'personal, internal use' and tie it to paid fees; a non-primary help article ('You have full commercial rights to all the videos you create using Lumen5') contradicts this. Per integrity rule, commercialUse cannot be primary-confirmed for the free tier => unclear (band Unclear).

The Terms & Conditions confirm the user owns their uploaded 'User's Content' (Section 9.1) but contain NO clause granting commercial-use rights or ownership of AI-generated OUTPUT. No primary-source permission exists, so commercial use of free-tier output cannot be certified safe.

Terms-of-service page is JS-gated; no commercial-use clause retrievable from a primary source.

Free-tier commercial rights not stated in public HTML; paid plans give unlimited covers but commercial scope unclear.

Terms/license page is JS-gated; no primary quote on commercial use obtainable. CC0 association is third-party knowledge, not verified.

A 'Commercial Use Policy' FAQ exists but its answer text is JS-rendered; no verbatim primary quote obtainable.

DECISIVE FACTOR, cannot be confirmed from a primary source. A re-fetch of the GTS (2026-06-16) surfaced no clause that grants or restricts commercial use of free-tier output, the terms address platform use and ownership, not output monetization. Art 10 grants only 'a personal, non-transferable, and non-exclusive right to use the Platform' 'subject to payment of the License Fee', a platform-use right, not an output-monetization grant, and it is conditioned on paying. Art 5.1 frames the free tier as a 'free trial', and every free export carries a watermark, so free output reads as a trial preview. Art 13 ('You retain all rights to the Content you submit') confirms ownership but is NOT an explicit grant to commercially monetize free-tier output. Because neither a grant nor a prohibition exists, per the integrity rule this is set 'unclear' (evidence:null) and the band becomes Unclear. Do not guess.

No verbatim commercial-use grant exists on the pricing page or in the Customer Agreement. Section 8 addresses ownership and AI-training but is silent on whether output may be used commercially, and the free tier cannot export at all. Marked unclear rather than guessed.

Free tier is widely reported as personal, non-commercial use only, with commercial rights granted only on paid plans. No official verbatim quote was reachable (pricing/subscription pages are JS-rendered and returned no text). Level 4 reflects the consistent reporting; treat exact wording as unconfirmed.

Seedance has no direct consumer terms. On every legitimate host (Dreamina, Jimeng, CapCut) the free tier reserves commercial use for paid plans, so free Seedance output cannot be monetized. No single verbatim Seedance-branded quote exists because the model is not sold directly; marked level 4 based on the host free-tier pattern and the absence of any free commercial grant.

Unclear. Synthesys markets full commercial rights on paid plans, but its Terms (synthesys.io/ai-terms) contain no clause stating whether free-trial output may be used commercially. With no verbatim free-tier commercial-use grant or ban, we won't guess, this is the deciding open question.

No public Spikes Studio page (pricing or FAQ) states whether free-tier output may be used commercially, and the Terms page is JS/login-gated and unfetchable as static content on 2026-06-23. No primary verbatim quote exists, so this is left unclear rather than assigned a risk level.

Terms page is bot-gated; no verbatim commercial-use clause reachable.

Terms page is bot-gated; no verbatim commercial-use clause reachable. Model-specific licenses can override the platform grant.

Terms/license JS-gated; no primary commercial-use sentence reachable.

Terms-of-service page JS-gated; no commercial-use clause retrievable from primary source.

Terms page unreachable to fetch; no commercial-use clause retrievable from primary source.

Page returns bot interstitial; no terms readable.

Third-party sources report free = personal/non-commercial and paid Studio = commercial, but primary pricing/terms pages were blocked by a bot challenge, so no PRIMARY-sourced quote could be captured. Treat free tier as NOT monetizable pending primary confirmation.

DECISIVE FACTOR, set to UNCLEAR. A full read of the Terms (last updated Oct 31, 2022) shows the word 'commercial' / 'monetiz' / 'non-commercial' / 'personal use' / 'output' appears NOWHERE in the document (verified by full-text scan). The 'User content' clause only grants VIZARD a license over user uploads 'solely for the operation and maintenance of the Website'; the IP clause quoted here only protects Vizard's OWN property and does not address whether the user may commercially publish their exported clips. There is no affirmative primary-source grant of commercial use, and no restriction either, pure silence. Per the integrity rule, commercialUse that cannot be primary-confirmed is scored unclear, which makes the overall band Unclear.

The Terms grant only a limited, revocable right to use the platform and are silent on whether free/Flex-tier output may be monetized. No primary source confirms commercial rights either way, so the decisive factor is honestly unclear, which forces the whole tool to Unclear.

Terms of Service is JS-gated; no primary commercial-use sentence reachable.

Public ToS/pricing do not plainly state free-tier commercial-use rights for generated animations; the ToS no-commercial clause targets the Site/Marks, not user output. Tied to plan tier.

Civitai's ToS confirms users retain ownership of Posted content (Section 9.1) but never grants a blanket commercial-use right to on-site generations; commercial use is governed per-model by each uploader's license flags. No single primary quote certifies free-tier commercial use as safe, so this is unclear.

Commercial rights are governed per-voice via individual AI Voice Model license pages; no blanket free-tier grant stated.

No VEED-OWN primary clause grants commercial use of general FREE-tier edited/captioned VIDEO output, which is the actual subject of this review. The only affirmative use-grant on VEED's own pages ('You may use your AI Images for any legal purpose, provided that you comply with these terms and accept that any such use is at your own risk') is scoped EXCLUSIVELY to 'AI Images', so it cannot justify a commercial-use level for general edited video. VEED's Terms of Sale contain ZERO occurrences of the word 'commercial', and its only user-content clause (9.3) is a license the user GRANTS to VEED ('you grant us a non-exclusive, irrevocable, royalty-free, worldwide licence to reproduce and use such content'), not a use-grant back to the user. Because the decisive factor cannot be confirmed for the actual free-tier output from a primary source, it is scored 'unclear' (evidence:null), which per the published override flips the whole rating to 'Unclear'. A scored level here would require a VEED-own clause granting commercial use of general free-tier video, which does not appear to exist on the fetched pages.

The Terms of Use grant no commercial-use right and impose no non-commercial restriction; §10 only asserts 2short's ownership of its own Service, leaving output commercial use unaddressed on every tier. Per the integrity rule this cannot be primary-confirmed, so it is scored unclear and forces the Unclear band.

Rask's terms grant general users commercial use of created Content, but this clause is not specifically scoped to free-trial users, and the watermark plus 3-minute cap make trial output unusable for monetization in practice. The clause is primary-source but does not clearly certify the FREE tier as monetizable, so level is unclear.

Terms of Service page renders empty/JS-gated; no commercial-use text obtainable.

Marketing clearly positions a paid Commercial product for monetized voiceovers vs a free Personal tier, but the binding Commercial license text is JS-rendered and could not be captured.

The only license grant in the Terms restricts platform use to 'personal use'; no clause affirmatively grants commercial or monetization use of the Deliverables. The ownership clause (15.7) gives you full IP in Deliverables, which implies you may exploit them, but the explicit 'personal use' wording creates genuine ambiguity. Per integrity rules, with no primary-source affirmative grant of commercial use, this is scored unclear (band -> Unclear). Note: the FREE 'Starter' tier is moot for this question because it cannot process your own footage at all.

Segmind's MCSA grants user ownership of outputs, but Segmind serves third-party models whose individual commercial-use terms are not restated, so per-model commercial use is unclear.

Terms §4.4 grant commercial use with no free-vs-paid distinction, but credible third-party and apparent help-center copy say free output is "personal/evaluation only." We could not reconcile this from a Higgsfield primary source (the pricing page is JS-gated), so we will not guess, the decisive factor is honestly Unclear, which sets the whole tool to Unclear.

Microsoft Services Agreement / Image Creator terms are widely documented as personal non-commercial, but the live terms page is JS-gated and the exact clause could not be extracted from a primary source.

Terms of Service link returns 404; no reachable primary statement on commercial use of free output.

Homepage implies broad creator rights but no reachable binding Terms/license page confirms commercial use.

Conflict: the Terms of Service grant broad commercial use of Output ('any lawful purpose'), but the pricing page labels the Free plan 'License: personal' vs 'License: business' on the Business tier and above. The ToS grant is not free-tier-specific and the personal-license plan label is unresolved against it, so for the FREE tier specifically this is Unclear, treated as unsafe.

The only license Gling grants is for personal, noncommercial use of the SITE. The Terms never address commercial use of exported video on any tier, and there is no primary affirmative grant of commercial rights to free or paid output, so commercial use is unclear.

Terms confirm full user ownership but contain no explicit commercial-use grant or restriction for images; left unclear.

Zebracat's pricing page lists "Commercial Rights" as a paid-tier feature, but NO Zebracat-owned page explicitly grants commercial use on the free tier. The terms don't distinguish free vs paid. With no primary quote certifying free-tier commercial use, this stays unclear (and practically unsafe given watermark removal being paid-only).

Ownership terms point toward free commercial use being allowed, and Firefly speech is marketed as commercially safe, but no verbatim line ties commercial rights specifically to the free Enhance Speech tier. Marked unclear rather than asserting a green light.

quso.ai's Terms of Service confirm users retain ownership but contain NO clause explicitly granting or addressing commercial use / monetization of free-tier exports, and do not differentiate by tier. No primary verbatim statement permits monetizing free output, so this cannot be certified safe. In practice the forced watermark blocks clean monetization regardless.

Google's NotebookLM help pages do not contain an explicit statement permitting or forbidding commercial use of generated audio. No verbatim quote on commercial monetization was found, so this is genuinely undocumented rather than confirmed safe or unsafe.

Official FAQ (updated Apr 29 2026) ties commercial rights to paid plans and contrasts 'Unlike some free-only tools,' so the free tier does not grant commercial use; unlocked on the cheapest paid Basic tier (see steve.ai for current pricing). Terms §5 grant only a 'limited, non-sub licensable, revocable and non-transferable license' with 'no ownership rights.' L3: not on free, unlocked cheap paid.

Commercial use of SD-family outputs permitted under Open RAIL-M (with use restrictions). Dezgo's own ToS grants no commercial license; rights flow per-model.

Free is non-commercial; commercial use (monetized video) is unlocked only on a paid premium plan (Music Creator License), not on free, unlocked on cheap paid = L3.

Free tier is non-commercial only. Commercial use is available but gated behind a paid tier, where ownership transfers to the user.

Decisive factor. The default Terms grant only a 'personal, worldwide, royalty-free, non-assignable, non-exclusive, revocable, and non-sublicensable license,' and commercial use is explicitly routed to a separate (paid) Services Agreement. The free 'trial for businesses' does not grant commercial rights; monetization is unlocked on the comparatively cheap Lite plan ($24-30/mo) once you accept that agreement. Level 3: commercial use not on free, available on a cheap paid tier.

User policy §4.6: free/non-member output may not be used for ANY commercial purpose without Kling's written permission. A paid membership is that permission (the paid terms grant members commercial use), so commercial monetization is not granted on free but unlocks on a low-cost membership.

Commercial rights are granted ONLY by the paid subscriptions LOVO explicitly enumerates (Basic, Pro, Pro+, Enterprise); the free plan is not listed, so monetization is not granted on free but is unlocked by the cheapest paid tier = L3. ToS §3.5 corroborates by tying permitted usage to 'your Subscription' and defining 'Commercial' as 'any monetized, business-related uses such as videos, audiobooks, advertising.' Verbatim quote pulled via LOVO's own Zendesk help-center API (the HTML page is Cloudflare-gated).

No free tier. Commercial license is sold separately as the Pro upgrade, so the base purchase does not clearly grant commercial rights.

THE decisive factor, stated plainly in FlexClip's own help center (Commercial Use Regulations, Apr 3, 2025): the free tier grants NO commercial-use license over FlexClip's stock library or AI-generated content, exactly the assets a faceless creator leans on. Commercial rights are unlocked on the cheap Plus plan ($11.99/mo). Not granted on free, trivially unlocked on a cheap paid tier = L3.

The main Terms of Service restrict ALL use of the Services to 'personal, non-commercial use only' and add: 'You must not access or use for any commercial purposes any part of the Services.' Commercial rights are granted ONLY on a paid plan, the Subscription Service Terms say: 'We do not claim ownership over content you generate and download while on a paid subscription plan ... you retain any and all intellectual property rights to such content, including the right to use it for commercial purposes.' That grant is scoped to paid users, so a free-tier creator monetizing video is outside the license. Because it is trivially unlocked on the cheap Standard tier ($14.99/mo), this is L3 (not L4). Decisive factor.

Commercial rights are gated to PAID plans only, Murf's own help center scopes commercial rights to 'all paid plans', so the free tier gets none. Trivially unlocked on the cheap Creator plan ($19/mo billed yearly), so L3 not L4. Note the TOS §5.1 ('You can use Murf created voices for commercial purposes') grants commercial use broadly without naming a tier, but the help center and the free-tier export block resolve the ambiguity: free output is not commercially usable. Decisive evidence is 'help' type (Murf-controlled but not the contract), hence Medium confidence.

Free tier is explicitly 'Non-commercial license' on the pricing page, and the Terms' only license grant is personal/non-commercial. Paid plans imply commercial rights but the terms text reached does not spell out a separate commercial grant.

Terms state the Services are 'generally provided for private, non-commercial use,' creating real ambiguity for monetizing free-tier output despite the ownership clause.

Decisive factor. Fliki's own pricing page grants the commercial license / monetization right only to 'subscription plans' (paid), and the plan-comparison table on the same page shows 'Commercial rights' and 'No watermark' enabled at Standard while the Free column is blank. The FAQ corroborates this twice: 'giving the user of any paid plan commercial rights' and 'with Fliki's subscription plans, you get commercial rights to the content created on the platform.' The free tier is therefore NOT granted a commercial license, so monetizing a free export is a breach. It is trivially unlocked on a cheap paid tier (Standard), which is the L3 pattern (commercial not granted on free, unlocked on cheap paid) rather than an explicit evaluation/personal-only ban (no 'free is non-commercial only' wording exists). This is what makes the tool Risky on free.

Commercial use IS granted, even without a subscription you may use what you create however you want, and the pricing page repeats '100% content ownership'. The catch is structural: the free tier produces nothing exportable, so the grant only becomes usable once you pay for export. Rights are not withheld on free; they are trivially unlocked on a cheap paid tier, which maps to L3 rather than an outright non-commercial restriction.

DECISIVE factor. Vidu's own Terms (Last Updated Oct 23, 2025) explicitly grant free users only a 'personal, non-commercial' license, with commercial use reserved 'for paid users.' Commercial rights are not granted on the free tier but are trivially unlocked on a cheap paid subscription => L3. Primary-confirmed, no guessing.

Broad restriction on commercial exploitation of service/content without written authorization.

Picsart's own Terms grant commercial use only for Picsart Content identified as Commercial Use, under a limited, non-transferable, revocable license; there is no clean blanket grant for free-tier user output. Commercial use on free is not safe.

Commercial use allowed only on paid Creator+ tiers; free/Explorer explicitly grant no rights. Safe only after upgrading.

THE decisive factor. Free use is contractually limited to personal, non-commercial use; commercial rights are NOT granted on the free tier. They are trivially unlocked on the cheapest paid tier (Starter $15/mo), which the same clause expressly licenses for commercial use. That is the textbook L3 pattern: not granted on free, trivially unlocked on a cheap paid tier. Confirmed verbatim from OpusClip's OWN Terms (effective Nov 17, 2025).

Decisive factor, primary-confirmed verbatim on the live pricing page. Krea's pricing FAQ lists the commercial license as a feature of Basic and every higher paid tier, the Free plan is conspicuously absent from that list, and the Free plan card itself never grants a commercial license (it stops at 'Limited access to image, video, 3D, and lipsync models' / '100 compute units per day'). The Terms reinforce that commercialization is tier-gated: 'Krea may allow you to commercialize certain Content generated from the Services, subject to your adherence to our copyright dispute policy and any other restrictions or requirements (including pricing changes) imposed by Krea' and use is 'subject to ... your specific subscription tier'. Commercial rights NOT granted on free but trivially unlocked on the cheap Basic tier ($63/yr) = L3.

Decisive factor. Free use is contractually personal/non-commercial; commercial rights are unlocked only by upgrading to a cheap paid tier (Plus $11/mo). The pricing page's own FAQ confirms it: 'Free plan users can only use generated content for personal, non-commercial projects.' A monetized faceless channel or paid client work on the free tier is off-license. Not granted on free, unlocked on cheap paid = L3 (matches the OpusClip precedent on this identical 'personal, non-commercial... Notwithstanding... Paid Services... commercial uses' boilerplate).

Commercial use is allowed but ONLY on paid plans; free/demo Platform is non-commercial.