Google Flow's own pages, read for what they say about training
Google Flow's pages state which models it runs — Nano Banana and Gemini Omni beside an audio-carrying Veo tier — that references can be turned into video, and three paid tiers under a free daily grant. On training the pages read are silent, and no instrument in this record addresses the question either. From 2 source pages, read 2026-09-12; no maker pays to be listed.
1What this record already holds
The rows this record already holds that bear on generated video: the article's own dates and duties, and what the record's Google-side entry describes.
- Article 1132 August 2026the date Article 50 starts to apply
- Article 50(2)Providers must mark synthetic audio, image, video and text in a machine-readable formatincluding general-purpose AI systems
- Article 50(4)Deployers must disclose image, audio or video content that is a deep fakefirst subparagraph
- Article 50(4)Deployers must disclose AI-generated text published to inform the public on matters of public interestsecond subparagraph
- SynthIDAn invisible watermark is embedded across Google's generative AI consumer products, added at the moment content is createdthe marking layer behind Google's video models
- SynthIDDesigned to stand up to cropping, filters, frame-rate changes and lossy compressionstated robustness
2What the maker's own pages state
The pages at flow.google.com name the models the tool runs: Nano Banana and Gemini Omni beside a Veo tier that carries its own audio, with an agent and a Scenebuilder above them. Characters and avatars are stated too, and references can be turned into video — a description of how a shot is asked for rather than of what the tool was taught.
The commercial half is laid out as plainly: fifty daily credits on a free Google account, and three tiers above it at $4.99, $19.99 and $99.99 a month, the first two adding two hundred and then a thousand monthly credits to that grant. Two conditions are attached in writing: what is on offer depends on the subscription tier, the platform and the region, and use is for those of 18 and over — limits a buyer can read before paying anything.
3The question the pages do not answer
The search this page answers is about training material: whether a company should train on books without permission. Put that question to the pages read and they come back empty. They describe which models are served, what a reference does, what a plan costs and who may use it; none of the statements is about the corpus behind any model.
This record writes that down as silence rather than as a denial, the same way it does on every entry: a page that does not address a question is recorded as not addressing it, and a reader is not invited to infer what was left unsaid. Nor does the record itself answer the question — it holds published texts, and no instrument in it sets terms for training rather than for outputs. What it can do is show what the disclosure side asks, which is the adjacent question and a different one.
4What the record's Google-side entry is about
The one Google entry in this record is a marking scheme. The page behind it describes an invisible watermark embedded across the company's generative models, designed to stand up to cropping, filters and frame-rate changes — a signal written at generation rather than a notice attached afterwards. Nothing in that entry speaks to training, and its presence here is worth separating from the question this page asks.
What the article rows hold is likewise about outputs. Providers must mark synthetic audio, image, video and text in a machine-readable format; deployers must disclose content that is a deep fake; text published to inform the public carries its own duty, with a carve-out where a person held editorial responsibility. From 2 August 2026, per the article that sets the date. Every one of those rows governs what is said about a result, not what a model learned from, and this record keeps the two apart.
5What the counted threads ask about the name
The material behind this column counts names rather than questions. The name below appears in 10,490 posts and 385 comment mentions over the window read, with 73 posts positive and 21 negative; the post quoted after the table is the one the collection caught, and it is about the product rather than about the training question.
That gap is the finding, not a shortcoming of the count. A register of what is published can report the volume of conversation and the wording of a page; it cannot turn either into a statement about a training set, and it does not.
6What each maker's own pages state
| Maker | What its own pages state | Read on |
|---|---|---|
| Google Flow | Google's models: Veo 3.1 (native audio), Nano Banana, Gemini Omni; an agent and Scenebuilder | 2026-10-13 |
| SceneMixer | “Every new video carries the SceneMixer AIGC badge in its bottom-right corner unless you turn it off.” | 2026-10-13 |
Inclusion rule. Rows are the makers this page reads, each on its own public pages, plus one pipeline this record follows. A cell carries that maker's own wording for the point; a page that does not address the point is written as unstated rather than read as a denial. Order. Alphabetical by maker name.
| Read for each of the three | Google Flow, on its own pages | Google SynthID, in this record | Article 50, as the Explorer prints it |
|---|---|---|---|
| What the source says about training | Nothing: the page read states models, references and plans | Nothing: the entry is a marking scheme | Nothing recorded: these rows govern what is disclosed about an output |
| What the source says about marking | Not stated on the page read | An invisible watermark embedded across Google's generative models | Providers must mark synthetic audio, image, video and text in a machine-readable format |
| What the source says about robustness | Not stated on the page read | Designed to stand up to cropping, filters and frame-rate changes | Solutions must be effective, interoperable, robust and reliable as far as technically feasible |
| The date carried by the reading | 2026-10-13 | 2026-09-12 | Applies from 2 August 2026, per Article 113 |
Inclusion rule. Cells are what each source states, taken from the source named in the header. A question a source does not address is written as unstated rather than answered from a neighbouring page of the same vendor. Order. As the questions are listed above.
7What the threads counted
A single name, counted over one window: posts, comment mentions and the two polarities, with the post the collection caught quoted after the table. It is a question about the product rather than about the corpus.
| Name | Posts | Comment mentions | Positive | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gemini | 10490 | 385 | 73 | 21 |
Inclusion rule. Names the collection counted and that this page is about. The tallies come from the same posts, and a post arguing with itself can land in both. Order. Descending by posts.
What do people think of Gemini Omni so far?
r/VEO3, collected 2026-10-14
8Where the other one fits a schedule better
- The model line is what is being bought — Veo 3.1 with native audio, Nano Banana and Gemini Omni sit on one account with an agent and a Scenebuilder, which is a suite rather than a single generator.
- A daily grant suits a gradual production — Free with a Google account at fifty daily credits, with tiers above it at $4.99, $19.99 and $99.99 — a shape that lets a first episode be made before any commitment.
- The access limits are published in advance — The page states that features vary by subscription tier, platform and region, and that access is 18 and over, which is a written limit rather than one discovered at sign-up.
Written for the search "Should AI companies train on books without permission?" Beside it: community rules and platform law and genre bans.