An external work done by someone else is implicitly owned by that creator.

i.e. if Rowling wrote some description about a bigoted neglected single mom striking it rich, and someone else actually wrote the work... than ownership is not guaranteed without legal assignment of rights to said work (depends on the location in the world). Thus, a publisher may not pay the muse unless under legal obligation of rights transfer, and having similar works further complicate exactly who owns the copyrights.

When you publish media or games, than the providence of assets/compositions become extremely important in a commercial setting.

I didn't make the rules, but do hire project artists all the time. The paperwork involved ends up ridiculously complicated, and requires specialized lawyers. This is why we avoid "AI" content, cloud based GPU service, and any vendor ignorant enough to force the issue. =3

Autodesk Nuke? That was genuinely painful to read. Setting aside the Freudian slip, you're projecting an unwarranted level of confidence, especially considering the information you're presenting is either outdated or just factually incorrect. I'm left wondering, why is that?

Could the people running the render recover the blend file you’re rendering?

That only applies to video game level stuff. Most "real" scenes from professional movies won't fit in RAM on a typical desktop, let alone the extremely limited VRAM on a GPU. For example (from 2016, so 10 years out of date): https://www.disneyanimation.com/data-sets/?drawer=/resources...

That's a prevalent misconception among people outside of offline rendering/VFX.

The short version is: no, it is not.

For this reason render farms for the CGI you see in blockbusters and series nowadays are usually CPU-only, still.

How do I know? I work in that industry.