Artists against image generators: lawsuit in the United States clears the next hurdle

Artists in the United States are happy with the partial success in their lawsuit against image generation providers. Judge William H. Orrick of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California writes that “the allegations of induced infringement are substantial.” The allegations of copyright infringement still continue. Some allegations were recently dismissed by Orrick.

Advertisement

The decision moves to the so-called disclosure stage. This means that artists’ lawyers can request documents and information about the structure of image generators from providers. You can get insight into training data and processes. Complaining artist Kelly McKernan writes on X: “… now we can find out everything that providers don’t want us to find out.” She calls this progress a big victory.

Image generators based on protected works

McKernan, Sarah Anderson, Carla Ortiz and other artists accused Midjourney, Runway, Stability.ai and DeviantArt of unlawfully using their works. The judge, who has jurisdiction over California’s Bay Area, where there are many AI companies, wrote in his ruling: “In this case, plaintiffs allege that Stable Diffusion relies heavily on copyrighted works and that the operation of the product necessarily uses copies or protected elements of these works.” It now needs to be clarified whether this is the provider’s intention – as the plaintiffs claim – or whether it is a coincidence or even a glitch, as the defendants say.

Noyb vs X: Illegal data collection for AI training

The original lawsuit is based on the fact that artists’ works were used for training purposes and that output “in the style of artists” was also possible from Stable Diffusion. Providers of other image and video generators were only added to the process. Initially, the lawsuit focused on the Lion Association, which provides training data sets that are later used by AI providers. However, Lion only provides a list of URLs from which training images must first be made usable using additional tools.

Carla Ortiz writes the artists filed the suit as a class action lawsuit on behalf of all rights holders similarly affected.

The judge had previously dismissed parts of the suit, such as unfair competition, advertising through artists and more. However, the judge also allowed an improved statement of claim to be presented here. Now the judge’s new interim ruling has come.

Interim Judge’s Decision: Sarah Anderson et al. v Sustainability AI Ltd et al.

(EMW)