AI platforms score early win in copyright class action

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

AI platforms score early win in copyright class action

Stability AI.jpeg

A California court dismissed most of the claims filed by a group of artists in a copyright case against Midjourney, Stability AI and DeviantArt

The US District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed most of the claims filed by a group of artists against three generative artificial intelligence platforms in a copyright case yesterday, October 30.

Artists Sarah Anderson, Kelly McKernan, and Karla Ortiz accused Midjourney, DeviantArt, and Stability AI of infringing their artwork.

In a class-action complaint filed in January this year, the artists alleged that the platforms had taken billions of training images that had been scraped from public websites, including their own. The platforms subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the claims.

Judge William Orrick dismissed the complaint against DeviantArt and Midjourney ruling that it “was defective in numerous aspects”.

Orrick allowed Anderson to pursue a claim that Stability AI had used her works for training.

However, he dismissed McKernan and Ortiz’s claims against Stability AI because they had not registered their work with the US Copyright Office – a prerequisite for bringing an infringement action in the US.

The judge also dismissed right of publicity and unfair competition claims brought against the three platforms.

Advantage AI

Earlier this year, when various copyright infringement lawsuits were filed against generative AI platforms, counsel predicted that the biggest challenge for copyright owners would be fending off the platforms’ motions to dismiss.

In his reasoning for siding with the AI platforms, Orrick noted that the plaintiffs admitted it was likely that the platforms' images would be unlikely to match with any specific image they had created.

The artists were, however, granted leave to amend their claims, which means they can rethink their arguments.

However, Orrick said he wasn’t convinced that allegations could survive if the artists failed to prove that the generated images were substantially similar to their works.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article