What licence covers an official ComfyUI template JSON, and does it say anything about the models the template downloads?
Problem. People assume that a template that downloads a model is 'MIT' and so the output is free to use commercially. Conditions. Using templates from the Comfy-Org/workflow_templates repo or its pip package. Method. Read the licence at three layers. (1) Repository and package: the LICENSE is MIT, copyright 2023-present Comfy Org, and pyproject declares MIT; the MIT grant is over the repo's 'Software and associated documentation files' (the template JSON, previews and scripts). (2) Per-template metadata: the manifest index has no licence field at all (fields found: date, description, includeOnDistributions, io, isApp, logos, mediaSubtype, mediaType, minComfyUIVersion, models, name, openSource, requiresCustomNodes, searchRank, size, tags, thumbnail, thumbnailVariant, title, tutorialUrl, usage, username). It has an openSource flag: true 256, false 411, missing 51 of 718 entries; neither the README nor the docs Templates page defines this flag, so treat it as UI metadata, not a licence...
Structured fields
{
"citations": [
{
"url": "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Comfy-Org/workflow_templates/main/LICENSE",
"note": "LICENSE; LICENSE; [project]; templates/index.json, all templates; researcher reasoning"
},
{
"url": "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Comfy-Org/workflow_templates/main/pyproject.toml",
"note": "LICENSE; LICENSE; [project]; templates/index.json, all templates; researcher reasoning"
},
{
"url": "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Comfy-Org/workflow_templates/main/templates/index.json",
"note": "LICENSE; LICENSE; [project]; templates/index.json, all templates; researcher reasoning"
}
]
}Evidence claims
- [sourced_fact] Problem. People assume that a template that downloads a model is 'MIT' and so the output is free to use commercially. Conditions. Using templates from the Comfy-Org/workflow_templates repo or its pip package. Method. Read the licence at three layers. (1) Repository and package: the LICENSE is MIT, copyright 2023-present Comfy Org, and pyproject declares MIT; the MIT grant is over the repo's 'Software and associated documentation files' (the template JSON, previews and scripts). (2) Per-template metadata: the manifest index has no licence field at all (fields found: date, description, includeOnDistributions, io, isApp, logos, mediaSubtype, mediaType, minComfyUIVersion, models, name, openSource, requiresCustomNodes, searchRank, size, tags, thumbnail, thumbnailVariant, title, tutorialUrl, usage, username). It has an openSource flag: true 256, false 411, missing 51 of 718 entries; neither the README nor the docs Templates page defines this flag, so treat it as UI metadata, not a licence statement (inference). Of the false entries 5 are not tagged API. (3) The models: each model is governed by its own upstream licence, which the template does not record. Failure modes. Reading the repo MIT as covering model weights or generated media; reading openSource true as 'commercial use allowed'. Limitations. Counts are for one fetch of index.json; the licence analysis of the repo is inference unless quoted. Version/date. 2026-10-24 UTC. · locator: LICENSE; LICENSE; [project]; templates/index.json, all templates; researcher reasoning source
Rights
| component | license | hosting | redistribution | modification | training | Evidence and notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| documentation | unknown | permitted | permitted | unknown | unknown | Applies to this original summary only, not to the cited sources. |