Two AI copyright cases, two very different outcomes – here’s why; The Conversation, December 1, 2025

Hayleigh Bosher, Reader in Intellectual Property Law, Brunel University of London , The Conversation; Two AI copyright cases, two very different outcomes – here’s why

"Artificial intelligence companies and the creative industries are locked in an ongoing battle, being played out in the courts. The thread that pulls all these lawsuits together is copyright.

There are now over 60 ongoing lawsuits in the US where creators and rightsholders are suing AI companies. Meanwhile, we have recently seen decisions in the first court cases from the UK and Germany – here’s what happened in those...

Although the circumstances of the cases are slightly different, the heart of the issue was the same. Do AI models reproduce copyright-protected content in their training process and in generating outputs? The German court decided they do, whereas the UK court took a different view.

Both cases could be appealed and others are underway, so things may change. But the ending we want to see is one where AI and the creative industries come together in agreement. This would preferably happen with the use of copyright licences that benefit them both.

Importantly, it would also come with the consent of – and fair payment to – creators of the content that makes both their industries go round."

Japan Police Accuse Man of Unauthorized Use of AI-Generated Image in Landmark Copyright Case; IGN, November 21, 2025

VERITY TOWNSEND, IGN ; Japan Police Accuse Man of Unauthorized Use of AI-Generated Image in Landmark Copyright Case

"Police in Japan have accused a man of unauthorized reproduction of an AI-generated image. This is believed to be the first ever legal case in Japan where an AI-generated image has been treated as a copyrighted work under the country’s Copyright Act.

According to the Yomiuri Shimbun and spotted by Dexerto, the case relates to an AI-generated image created using Stable Diffusion back in 2024 by a man in his 20s from Japan’s Chiba prefecture. This image was then allegedly reused without permission by a 27-year-old man (also from Chiba) for the cover of his commercially-available book. 

The original creator of the image told the Yomiuri Shimbun that he had used over 20,000 prompts to generate the final picture. The police allege that the creator had sufficient involvement in the AI image’s creation, and the matter has been referred to the Chiba District Public Prosecutors Office.

Japan’s Copyright Act defines a copyrighted work as a “creatively produced expression of thoughts or sentiments that falls within the literary, academic, artistic, or musical domain.” In regard to whether an AI-generated image can be copyrighted or not, the Agency of Cultural Affairs has stated that an AI image generated with no instructions or very basic instructions from a human is not a “creatively produced expression of thoughts or sentiments” and therefore not considered to meet the requirements to be copyrighted work.

However, if a person has used AI as a tool to creatively express thoughts or feelings, the AI-generated output might be considered a copyrighted work. This is to be decided on a case-by-case basis. The process behind the creation of the specific AI-generated image has to be looked at in order to determine whether it can be considered to be creative enough to be termed a copyrighted work. Key criteria are the amount of detailed prompts, the refining of instructions over repeated generation attempts, and creative selections or changes to outputs."

Stability AI’s legal win over Getty leaves copyright law in limbo; The Verge, November 5, 2025

Robert Hart , The Verge; Stability AI’s legal win over Getty leaves copyright law in limbo

"Stability AI, the creator of popular AI art tool Stable Diffusion, was largely victorious against Getty Images on Tuesday in a British legal battle over the material used to train AI models. The case originally looked set to produce a landmark ruling on AI and copyright in the UK, but it landed with a thud and failed to set any clear precedent for the big question dividing AI companies and creative firms: whether AI models need permission to train on copyrighted works.

The case, first filed in 2023, is the first major AI copyright claim to reach England’s High Court, though the verdict offers little clarity to other AI companies and rightsholders."

Getty drops copyright allegations in UK lawsuit against Stability AI; AP, June 25, 2025

 KELVIN CHAN, AP; Getty drops copyright allegations in UK lawsuit against Stability AI

"Getty Images dropped copyright infringement allegations from its lawsuit against artificial intelligence company Stability AI as closing arguments began Wednesday in the landmark case at Britain’s High Court. 

Seattle-based Getty’s decision to abandon the copyright claim removes a key part of its lawsuit against Stability AI, which owns a popular AI image-making tool called Stable Diffusion. The two have been facing off in a widely watched court case that could have implications for the creative and technology industries."

Artists Score Major Win in Copyright Case Against AI Art Generators; The Hollywood Reporter, August 13, 2024

Winston Cho, The Hollywood Reporter; Artists Score Major Win in Copyright Case Against AI Art Generators

"Artists suing generative artificial intelligence art generators have cleared a major hurdle in a first-of-its-kind lawsuit over the uncompensated and unauthorized use of billions of images downloaded from the internet to train AI systems, with a federal judge allowing key claims to move forward.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick on Monday advanced all copyright infringement and trademark claims in a pivotal win for artists. He found that Stable Diffusion, Stability’s AI tool that can create hyperrealistic images in response to a prompt of just a few words, may have been “built to a significant extent on copyrighted works” and created with the intent to “facilitate” infringement. The order could entangle in the litigation any AI company that incorporated the model into its products."

Beijing Internet Court Recognizes Copyright in AI-Generated Images; The National Law Review, November 29, 2023

 Aaron Wininger of Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A., The National Law Review; Beijing Internet Court Recognizes Copyright in AI-Generated Images

"On November 27, 2023 the Beijing Internet Court issued a decision recognizing copyright in AI-generated images. The plaintiff, Mr. Li, used Stable Diffusion (an artificial intelligence) to generate the image involved in the case and published it on the Xiaohongshu platform; the defendant, a blogger on Baijiahao, used the image generated by the plaintiff’s AI to accompany the article, and the plaintiff sued. The Court held that the artificial intelligence-generated image involved in the case met the requirements of “originality” and reflected a human’s original intellectual investment and should be recognized as works and protected by copyright law. This is the opposite of the decision reached by the U.S. Copyright Office in Zarya of the Dawn (Registration # VAu001480196) that did not recognize copyright in AI-generated images. Note this Beijing case is also different from the recent Thaler v. Perlmutter decision (Civil Action No. 22-1564 (BAH)) because Thaler was trying to recognize the AI as the author and not the person using the AI as a tool as author."

Patent Poetry: Judge Throws Out Most of Artists’ AI Copyright Infringement Claims; JD Supra, November 20, 2023

  Adam Philipp, AEON Law, JD Supra; Patent Poetry: Judge Throws Out Most of Artists’ AI Copyright Infringement Claims

"One of the plaintiffs’ theories of infringement was that the output images based on the Training Images are all infringing derivative works.

The court noted that to support that claim the output images would need to be substantially similar to the protected works. However, noted the court,

none of the Stable Diffusion output images provided in response to a particular Text Prompt is likely to be a close match for any specific image in the training data.

The plaintiffs argued that there was no need to show substantial similarity when there was direct proof of copying. The judge was skeptical of that argument.

This is just one of many AI-related cases making its way through the courts, and this is just a ruling on a motion rather than an appellate court decision. Nevertheless, this line of analysis will likely be cited in other cases now pending.

Also, this case shows the importance of artists registering their works with the Copyright Office before seeking to sue for infringement."

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."

DeviantArt, Midjourney Face Lawsuit for Using 'Billions of Copyrighted' Images in AI Art; CBR, January 15, 2023

BRIAN CRONIN, CBR ; DeviantArt, Midjourney Face Lawsuit for Using 'Billions of Copyrighted' Images in AI Art

"A lawsuit on behalf of a group of plaintiff artists has been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against three companies: Stability AI, DeviantArt, and Midjourney, over the alleged infringement of the copyright of the artists in the creation of so-called "artificial intelligence" art."