Getty Images<\/a>, a global visual content creator and marketplace, sued Stability AI<\/a>, an open-source generative AI company, in the UK courts. Getty claimed Stability had illegally used its content to train an AI model called Stable Diffusion. Getty is also suing Stability AI in the US and that case is on-going. <\/p>\n It was accepted that Getty\u2019s images were used in the training of Stable Diffusion But the plot twist here is that the training of Stable Diffusion took place outside the UK, meaning that Getty ended up narrowing their copyright case to focus on what is called \u201csecondary infringement\u201d \u2013 which is essentially the same as importing goods that infringe copyright. It is illegal to bring counterfeit DVDs into the UK for the same reason.<\/p>\n At trial, the judge had to decide something for the first time ever. This was: if a user downloads an AI model in the UK that was illegally trained on copyrighted content in another country, does that count as secondary copyright infringement? To do so, she had to consider two things. The first was: can the definition of an \u201carticle\u201d include intangible goods? <\/p>\n When someone imports a box of counterfeit DVDs, these are called \u201carticles\u201d under the law, and are obviously physical, tangible objects. Stability AI argued that its AI model (system) was not an \u201carticle\u201d because it is not a physical object. The judge, sensibly, understood that the law was written long before the new era of AI, but the intention behind the rule was to include both tangible and intangible goods.<\/p>\n The second thing the judge had to consider was: is the Stable Diffusion AI model what copyright law calls an \u201cinfringing copy\u201d? <\/p>\n The judge took this to mean the model would need to physically contain a reproduction of Getty\u2019s content. But the way the model \u201clearned\u201d from the training data, according to the expert evidence, meant that it did not actually contain any copies. So, Getty lost the claim for secondary copyright infringement.<\/p>\n Stable Diffusion is an AI art generator developed by Stability AI. Differing interpretations<\/p>\n Meanwhile, one of the world\u2019s largest collecting societies for musical works, GEMA<\/a>,
\nwithout permission, and that this training involved copying. Copyright is the right to stop someone copying your work, so training an AI model on copyright-protected content without permission would be an infringement of copyright under UK law.<\/p>\n![\"Stable](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/file-20251126-66-xrv5be.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n Olivia_Brown<\/a><\/p>\n
\nfiled a copyright lawsuit against the company OpenAI in Germany. This was for the use of song lyrics in its large language model ChatGPT.<\/p>\n