Reasons printed beside a mark, and where
Three entries publish a reason beside a marking decision: compliance, disclosure, and avoiding a collision with a platform's own label. Two of those argue for keeping a mark and one for removing it. As of 2026-09-22.
| Generator | User toggle | Document read |
|---|---|---|
| D-ID | Plan benefit, not a setting | pricing page |
| SceneMixer | Yes, in settings | compliance guide |
| Wan | A request parameter, not a plan | video generation guide |
Inclusion rule. Entries whose pages give a stated reason for applying a mark or for allowing it to be removed. A price is not a reason, and neither is an unexplained feature line. Order. Alphabetical by generator name.
1Three arguments, from three kinds of document
A pricing page gives disclosure as its reason: the mark is there so that there is transparency about the synthetic nature of the videos users generate. A console guide gives compliance, attributing an unremovable stamp to legal requirements. A compliance guide gives an operational reason for removal, that a publishing platform adding its own label would put two labels on one frame.
None of the other twelve entries offers a reason of any kind. Their marking lines are packaging decisions printed without justification, which is the ordinary state of a feature grid: nothing on it explains why a feature exists, only which plan includes it.
2Why a stated reason is worth recording
It predicts what a future change looks like. A mark held in place by a compliance argument does not move when a pricing page is redesigned, because the argument is not about packaging. A mark held in place by nothing at all moves whenever the grid does, and a reader planning around it should expect that.
The register cannot audit any of the three. Whether a legal requirement actually obliges the stamp, and whether the disclosure argument is the real motive, are questions no published page settles. What can be recorded is that a reason was given, which reason, and by whom.
3Where each argument stops
The disclosure argument covers two plans and is not extended to the ones above them, so the mark that discloses synthetic origin disappears when a customer pays enough. The compliance argument covers one surface and the same models are reachable through another that defaults to no stamp. The removal argument covers the case where a destination adds a label of its own.
Each reason is therefore narrower than it first reads, and none of the three is presented as a policy about the product. The register records the scope alongside the reason for the same purpose it records everything else: so a reader can see where the statement stops.
4Sources
- RationaleThe pricing page gives a reason for the mark: that there is transparency about the synthetic nature of the videos users generatepublished beside the mark
- ControlThe console watermark cannot be turned off from the console UI, which the page attributes to legal compliance requirementsno switch on the console surface
- User toggleAn AIGC watermark switch in settings turns it offno plan condition stated
Every row above is read from the vendor page named beside it, on 2026-09-22. The same values in register form are on the support table, the rule for this column is on the control column page, and what may fill a cell at all is on the what earns a row page. Other findings: marks that get described, paid plans still marked.