top of page
Capital Culture

Artists Receive Favorable Outcome In Copyright Case Versus AI Art Generators

Updated: Sep 30



As reported by The Hollywood Reporter, artists involved in the legal battle against generative artificial intelligence art generators have achieved a significant victory as a federal judge has allowed key claims to move forward in their pioneering lawsuit. U.S. District Judge William Orrick has advanced all copyright infringement and trademark claims, signaling a win for the artists involved. The judge found that Stable Diffusion, an AI tool developed by Stability that can generate hyperrealistic images based on minimal prompts, might have been "built to a significant extent on copyrighted works" with the intent to "facilitate" infringement. This ruling could potentially entangle any AI company that integrated the model into its products in the ongoing litigation.



While claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act were dismissed, the case will proceed to discovery. This phase could reveal crucial details about how AI firms gathered copyrighted materials for training large language models. The lawsuit, filed last year, centers around the LAION data set, which allegedly incorporated 5 billion images scraped from the internet and utilized by Stability and Runway to create Stable Diffusion. The complaint involves artists such as Karla Ortiz, known for her work on projects like Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok.


Karla Ortiz | Source X.com page

The court's decision carries significant implications for the use of copyrighted materials to train AI systems and the eligibility of AI-generated works for copyright protection. It also raises novel legal questions about the intellectual property rights surrounding AI tools in the entertainment industry. The artists' lawsuit alleges that Stability and Runway induced copyright infringement and that Stable Diffusion itself infringes on copyrighted works. The court sided with the artists, stating that the product is built on copyrighted material and was designed to facilitate infringement.


Additionally, the court rejected arguments from the AI companies that the lawsuit must identify specific, individual works used for training, noting that the unique circumstances of the case do not require such detailed information at this stage. Furthermore, trademark claims have been allowed to move forward, highlighting the potential for consumer deception regarding artists' endorsement of AI-generated products.


In the upcoming discovery phase, the artists' legal team is expected to seek information related to the development of Stable Diffusion and the LAION data set. The lawsuit represents a significant development in the ongoing debate over the intersection of AI technology and intellectual property rights, particularly in the creative industries.





3 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page