Judge William Orrick agreed with the companies that the images created by the systems likely did not infringe the artists' copyrights. He allowed the claims to be amended but expressed skepticism that allegations based on the systems' output could survive without proof that the images were substantially similar to the artists' work. The judge also dismissed other claims from the artists, including violation of their publicity rights and unfair competition, but gave them permission to refile. McKernan and Ortiz's copyright claims were dismissed because they had not registered their images with the U.S. Copyright Office, a prerequisite for a copyright lawsuit.
Key takeaways:
- A judge in California federal court has trimmed a lawsuit by visual artists who accuse Stability AI, Midjourney and DeviantArt of misusing their copyrighted work in connection with the companies' generative artificial intelligence systems.
- The judge dismissed some claims from the proposed class action brought by Sarah Andersen, Kelly McKernan and Karla Ortiz, including all of the allegations against Midjourney and DeviantArt.
- The judge allowed Andersen to continue pursuing her key claim that Stability's alleged use of her work to train Stable Diffusion infringed her copyrights.
- The judge dismissed McKernan and Ortiz's copyright claims because they had not registered their images with the U.S. Copyright Office, a requirement for bringing a copyright lawsuit.