Which entries mark the models they made themselves
Almost nobody marks the difference. Several entries put their own models and other makers' on one table in the same type, with a reader expected to already know which maker each name belongs to. One acknowledges the mixture in its plan wording without marking any row. As of 2026-09-12.
| Entry | What is published | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Luma | The plan wording mentions other makers | Individual rows carry no marking |
| Adobe Firefly | Partner models are named per tier | Which is the nearest thing to marking |
| PixVerse | A house line listed with licensed models | No marking distinguishes them |
| Runway | House and licensed rows, same conversion table | No marking on any row |
| invideo AI | Every line is another maker's | So nothing needs distinguishing |
Inclusion rule. An entry appears when its own public pages name models from more than one maker. Marking counts when the page itself distinguishes them, not when a reader can. Order. Entries acknowledging the mixture first, then the rest.
1Two failure modes in the same typeface
A house line goes when the seller decides. A licensed line goes when somebody else does and arrives as an edit. Presenting them identically hides which kind of ending a reader is exposed to.
Marking the licensed rows would change nothing about the risk and everything about whether a reader can see it. Two entries reached the same unmarked arrangement without coordinating.
2Tier gating is accidental marking
Where partner models are named per plan tier, a reader learns which models are partners as a side effect of learning which plan reaches them. That is more information than an unmarked table gives.
It also creates a second way to lose access, because a tier can move without anything being retired. Disclosure and exposure arrive together.
3An aggregator needs no marking
An entry with no models of its own has nothing to distinguish, so its list is honest by construction. It also has no floor under it: if every licensed line went, nothing would remain.
The two layers of aggregation read against each other set out what that difference costs in the worst case.
- How the plan describes the menu it sellsPlans are described as covering Luma models alongside models from other makers
4Sources
Dates come from the vendor that makes the model; menus come from the app, and both are linked on the calendar. Read 2026-09-12. What counts as a date is on sourcing. Nearby: Downloadable weights, Tier and model, Who publishes a date.