A new development takes place in a California federal court where artists filed a lawsuit against AI illegally using their copyrighted work. The visual artists filed the lawsuit against Stability AI, DeviantArt, and Midjourney. They claimed that these companies misused their copyrighted work.
The court trimmed certain claims in connection with generative artificial intelligence systems. These reduced claims come from the District Judge, William Orrick, on Monday.
Karla Ortiz, Sarah Andersen, and Kelly McKernan are the visual artists in question who brought the proposed class action against the AI platforms. Judge Orrick dismissed some of the claims. He dismissed all allegations against Midjourney and DeviantArt.
However, he stated that the artists could file an amended complaint against the two companies. Both Midjourney and DeviantArt use Stability’s Stable Diffusion text-to-image technology in their systems.
Furthermore, the court dismissed McKernan and Ortiz’s copyright infringement claims completely. Still, Judge Orrick allowed Andersen to continue pursuing her primary claim. It centers on Stability’s illegal use of her work to train Stable Diffusion. Her complaint states that the use allegedly infringed her copyrights.
This central claim also comes up in other lawsuits by artists and copyright owners against generative AI platforms. Judge Orrick acknowledged that the truth cannot be judged at this point.
In their statement, the artists’ attorneys, Joseph Saveri and Matthew Butterick, stated their “core claim” was still standing after the trim. They seemed confident in addressing the court’s concerns with an amended complaint which will be coming next month.
“Even Stability recognizes that determination of the truth of these allegations – whether copying in violation of the Copyright Act occurred in the context of training Stable Diffusion or occurs when Stable Diffusion is run – cannot be resolved at this juncture,” Judge Orrick said.