Federal judge William Orrick dismissed the majority of the copyright infringement claims brought by three artists against Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt. The claims were based on the use of the artists’ work to train AI models. Two artists dropped their claims due to lack of copyright registration. The judge ruled that the claims were defective and required clarification. Stability AI still faces a copyright infringement claim from the remaining artist.
Federal judge dismisses copyright case against AI art generators
A federal judge has dismissed the majority of copyright infringement claims brought by three artists against Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt. The artists claimed that their work was used to train AI models, which then generated derivative works without their permission.
However, two of the artists had to drop their claims when it was discovered that they hadn’t registered copyrights for their work before suing. This left one artist, Sarah Anderson, as the sole plaintiff on the copyright claims.
The claims centered around Stability AI’s Stable Diffusion model, with Midjourney and DeviantArt accused of being complicit in using the model.
Understanding the judge’s ruling
The judge ruled that the claims were “defective in numerous respects.” One key aspect of the decision was the wording of the claims and an understanding of how AI image generators actually work.
The defense argued that the claim that copies of billions of images were stored in the model was not only false but also impossible. Stability AI explained that its model extracts attributes from images, such as lines, shades, and colors, to develop parameters related to these.
The judge’s ruling stated that the plaintiffs needed to clarify their theory regarding compressed copies of training images and provide facts supporting how Stable Diffusion operates with respect to these images.
The judge also questioned whether DeviantArt and Midjourney could be held liable for direct copyright infringement if Stable Diffusion only contains algorithms and instructions that can be applied to the creation of images with only a few elements of a copyrighted image.
The artists will need to prove that Midjourney produces substantially similar works to their images if they want to reintroduce their amended claims.
Implications and practical AI solutions
While Midjourney and DeviantArt are no longer facing liability at the moment, Stability AI still needs to address Anderson’s direct copyright infringement claim. The outcome of this case could have ramifications for other generative models.
If your company wants to evolve with AI and stay competitive, it’s essential to understand the implications of this copyright case. Here are some practical AI solutions to consider:
- Identify Automation Opportunities: Locate key customer interaction points that can benefit from AI.
- Define KPIs: Ensure your AI initiatives have measurable impacts on business outcomes.
- Select an AI Solution: Choose tools that align with your needs and offer customization.
- Implement Gradually: Start with a pilot, gather data, and expand AI usage judiciously.
If you need advice on AI KPI management or want to explore AI solutions, connect with us at hello@itinai.com. Stay updated on leveraging AI by following our Telegram channel t.me/itinainews or Twitter @itinaicom.
Spotlight on a Practical AI Solution: AI Sales Bot
Consider using the AI Sales Bot from itinai.com/aisalesbot to automate customer engagement and manage interactions across all stages of the customer journey. Discover how AI can redefine your sales processes and customer engagement. Explore solutions at itinai.com.
