Getty Narrows Lawsuit Against Stability AI, Drops Central Copyright Claims

Getty Images has dropped its central copyright infringement claims against Stability AI. This is a significant twist in the first major legal showdown over artificial intelligence and copyright in the UK.

The decision came this week as both sides delivered closing arguments at London’s High Court. Getty will no longer pursue the core allegation that Stability AI unlawfully used millions of Getty-owned photographs to train its AI model, Stable Diffusion. However, the Seattle-based photo agency continues to pursue claims related to trademark infringement, “passing off,” and secondary copyright infringement.

A Trial That Could Reshape Copyright Law

This case has drawn intense attention from artists and tech companies alike. It is considered a potential bellwether for how courts will handle copyright disputes in the age of AI.

Getty filed the lawsuit in early 2023, accusing Stability AI of “brazen infringement” on a “staggering scale.” The photo giant argued that the startup used its images – including some still bearing watermarks – without permission to train its popular image generator. Getty CEO Craig Peters previously stated that creators should be asked for consent before their works are fed into AI models.

In contrast, Stability AI has argued that their use falls under fair use and fair dealing laws in the US and UK. The company also questioned the court’s jurisdiction, asserting that most of the training occurred outside the UK – primarily on Amazon servers in the United States.

[Related Reading: Getty vs Stability AI: The Copyright Trial That Could Change Everything for Photographers]

The Reason Behind the Withdrawal

Legal experts suggest the dropped claims likely stem from jurisdictional challenges. Getty may have struggled to prove that Stability’s alleged infringing actions happened within the UK.

“It was always anticipated to be challenging to prove that connection to the UK,” Alex Shandro, an AI law expert observing the trial, told the AP. Getty’s legal team called it a “pragmatic decision” to focus on claims more likely to succeed.

Ben Maling, a partner at EIP law firm, elaborated: “The training claim has likely been dropped due to Getty failing to establish a sufficient connection between the infringing acts and the UK… the output claim likely failed to show that what was reproduced reflects a substantial part of the original.”

Stability AI Responds

Stability AI welcomed the development. A company spokesperson said, “We are pleased to see Getty’s decision to drop multiple claims… We look forward to the court’s final judgment.”

Yet, the battle isn’t over. Getty continues to argue that even if training happened elsewhere, deploying the AI in the UK could count as importing infringing works. It also claims the AI model reproduced Getty’s watermark, potentially misleading consumers.

A Cross-Atlantic Legal Battle

This UK trial runs parallel to a separate lawsuit Getty filed in the United States, where it is seeking $1.7 billion in damages. Getty claims Stability AI used over 12 million of its images without a license. The outcome of that case remains pending.

While Getty’s decision to drop its core copyright claims narrows the case, key legal questions remain. The company is still pursuing a secondary infringement claim and trademark allegations. According to Getty, even if AI training occurred outside the UK, the act of using the trained models within Britain could still violate copyright law. Getty argues that the AI models themselves may qualify as “infringing articles,” and that bringing them into the country constitutes secondary infringement.

“Secondary infringement is the one with widest relevance to genAI companies training outside of the UK, namely via the models themselves potentially being ‘infringing articles’ that are subsequently imported into the UK,” Ben Maling, a partner at EIP, told TechCrunch.

A final ruling in this closely watched trial is expected in the coming months and may have far-reaching consequences for AI developers operating across jurisdictions.

Meanwhile, legal scrutiny of AI companies continues to mount. In the U.S. this week, a judge dismissed a major claim in a similar suit against Anthropic, ruling that training AI on copyrighted content might be permissible under current law.

A final decision in the UK trial is expected in the coming months. While the dropped claims may narrow the case, the outcome could still have lasting effects on how AI companies use creative content. For photographers and artists, this case remains a pivotal moment in the ongoing fight for compensation and recognition in the AI age.

[Related Reading: AI Photography Explained: Tools, Techniques & Future Trends]

[via PetaPixel]

---