AI Art Generators Spark Multiple Copyright Lawsuits; The Hollywood Reporter, January 17, 2023

 Winston Cho, The Hollywood Reporter; AI Art Generators Spark Multiple Copyright Lawsuits

"Whether AI programs, built on models that analyze the patterns of copyrighted works, violate the intellectual property rights of artists is up in the air. Engineers build AI art generators by feeding algorithms large databases of images downloaded from the internet without licenses. The artists’ suit asks whether the AI firms infringed on the copyrights of artists by using copyrighted works to train AI tools and when consumers used the art generators to create new works. It also asks whether the conduct is protected under fair use, which allows for use of protected works without permission as long as they are transformative."

Is a picture really worth £1,000?, London Guardian, 11/27/08

Via London Guardian: Is a picture really worth £1,000?
A church and small businesses are just some of those accusing picture agencies of using heavy-handed tactics when pursuing payment:

"Dozens of small businesses and charities tell similar stories. On the online forums run by the Federation of Small Businesses, copyright infringement blows away every other subject. Many of those posting on the federation's forum have tried to do everything right; they aren't arguing about copyright. It's the enforcement tactics they find objectionable...

In the UK they'd struggle to make these amounts stick," he says. "UK law is only concerned with restoring the situation had licensing been correctly obtained. The courts don't like to be used as a means of extortion."

Drake says: "I understand the difficulty companies like Getty have and photographers have - they have a product that needs to be protected. But where is the Getty publicity campaign? Why aren't they issuing press releases and education to remind people that these images are not to be used?"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/nov/27/internet-photography