In a recent class action lawsuit, artists were left at a disadvantage as a US District Court Judge indicated a likelihood to dismiss claims against artificial intelligence (AI) companies. The case focused on companies like Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt that develop AI tools capable of generating images from text.
Skepticism Surrounding Artists’ Claims
Judge William Orrick, Northern District of California, dismissed artists’ claim of AI-generated images as copyright violation. During Zoom hearing, Orrick stated, “No substantial similarity between artists’ and AI images.”
Copyright violations usually demand direct work comparison for infringement. However, artists argue that AI companies’ use of their artwork in training datasets constitutes copyright infringement.
AI Training: A Complex Issue
The artists claim the models, trained on their works, create derivative works infringing copyrights. However, the defendants’ attorneys expose flaws in these claims.
Among the plaintiffs (Sarah Andersen, Karla Ortiz, and Kelly McKernan), only Andersen registered her works with the U.S. Copyright Office. This absence poses a hurdle to asserting valid infringement claims.
Judge Orrick also questioned the significant impact of these three artists’ works on the models, given they were trained on billions of images.
Uncharted Territory in Copyright Law
Orrick’s stance on the lawsuit corroborates the viewpoint of legal and technology analysts that current copyright law is ill-prepared to handle potential injustices caused by AI technology.
An ongoing study by Parrot Zone has demonstrated that image-generator models can mimic the styles of thousands of artists without recreating any specific works. This exposes a loophole in existing copyright laws that don’t provide protection for “style,” which AI image-generators can potentially exploit.
Pending Verdict, Future Implications
While the judge’s official decision is still pending, his preliminary stance could offer the artists a chance to refile and strengthen their lawsuit. Regardless, this case highlights the urgent need for copyright law to evolve and adequately address the complex issues arising from AI advancements.
Related Articles
