"London's High Court has dismissed the major portions of Getty Images' lawsuit against generative AI firm Stability AI for training its image-generation model on copyrighted images, which some legal experts say could weaken intellectual property laws."
"But Getty couldn't prove that any of that training had taken place in the UK, forcing it to drop its more general claim of copyright infringement in the middle of the trial. "Getty Images may be able to maintain such a case in the jurisdiction where the Model was in fact trained, but there is no basis for that case in this jurisdiction," Smith wrote in her decision."
"Getty did try to make a case of secondary infringement - that is, arguing that even if the training took place elsewhere, importing infringing content was still illegal. But Smith dismissed that claim as well. Because generative models like Stable Diffusion don't store actual copies of the content they're trained on, instead recording the weights, secondary infringement doesn't apply, Smith explained."
Justice Joanna Smith affirmed only a portion of Getty's claims, finding that watermarks appearing on AI-generated images could amount to trademark infringement. The High Court dismissed the remainder of Getty's lawsuit because Getty could not prove that the model training occurred in the UK, and thus UK copyright claims could not be maintained. The court also rejected a secondary infringement argument, reasoning that generative models like Stable Diffusion do not retain actual copies of training images but update model weights, so possessing or using the model is not equivalent to importing infringing copies. Experts differ on IP implications.
Read at Theregister
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]