No, but you'd assume that all the pixels in a "random noise" image are independent and identically distributed. Procedural noise generally has correlation between pixels
:) I had started to write in my cooment that really the only thing I'd find surprising is that it's not IID but these are random pictures not random pixels.
An image of IID pixels is a very unusual one, and I assume that picture to picture their process is IID.
Another way of looking at it, say you image an image with iid exponentially distributed pixels. The bits in the image file, however, would not be iid. So just because you can point to some part and say it's not iid doesn't make it wrong to call it random, it's just a question of what scale you're operating at.
Similarly, if you made an image that was 1/f instead of totally spectral flat, it wouldn't be IID (looking at the pixels alone, again)-- but I don't think anyone would fail to call a such an image "random noise".
