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

A ruling on confidentiality by the the England and Wales Court of Appeal and an intervention from the US government in the InterDigital v Disney litigation were also among top talking points
Moore & Van Allen hires former Teva counsel Larry Rickles to help expand the firm’s life sciences capabilities
Canadian law firms should avoid ‘tunnel vision’ as exclusive survey reveals client dissatisfaction with risk management advice and value-added services
In major recent developments, the CoA ruled on director liability for patent infringement, and Nokia targeted Paramount at the UPC and in Germany
Niri Shan, the newly appointed head of IP for UK, Ireland and the Middle East, explains why the firm’s international setup has brought UPC success, and addresses German partner departures
Vlad Stanese joins our ‘Five minutes with’ series to discuss potentially precedent-setting trademark and copyright cases and his love for aviation
Heath Hoglund, president of Via LA, discusses how it sets royalty rates and its plans to build on growth in China
Stobbs stands accused of interfering with the administration of justice after Brandsmiths’ client was subjected to an interim injunction for unjustified threats
The firm, known for its prosecution expertise, discusses its plans following the appointment of a UK-based patent litigation head and two new partners
Ed White at Clarivate provides an exclusive insight into the innovation power clusters reshaping Europe and the Middle East’s IP landscape, and why quality is the new currency of invention
Gift this article