Introduction
The ongoing legal dispute between Getty Images and Stability AI is set to significantly impact copyright licensing in the realm of artificial intelligence (AI) [7]. This case [4] [7], which is currently awaiting trial in the High Court in London [7], could lead to reforms in UK copyright law and influence the attractiveness of the UK as a hub for AI development.
Description
The case initially focused on Getty’s allegations that Stability AI unlawfully scraped millions of copyrighted images to train its generative AI system, Stable Diffusion [1] [3] [6] [7], without obtaining a license. However, Getty has recently withdrawn its primary copyright infringement claims, citing weak evidence and the lack of knowledgeable witnesses from Stability AI. The focus has now shifted to trademark infringement [5], passing off [1], and secondary copyright claims [3] [5]. Getty argues that the AI models themselves may infringe copyright law and that using these models in the UK could be considered importing infringing articles [2], regardless of where the training occurred [2].
Stability AI has admitted to using some Getty images in its training process but disputes many of the allegations [7]. The company contends that the images generated from text prompts do not reproduce copyrighted works and likens its processes to how humans use search engines, which typically do not constitute copyright infringement [4]. In its closing submissions [3], Getty acknowledged that while evidence supported its claims of copyright infringement [3], it lacked sufficient clarity on Stability AI’s development and training processes [3]. Stability AI’s defense strategy includes various arguments tailored to different claims [7], asserting that any unauthorized copying is the responsibility of the user [7]. If these defenses are unsuccessful [7], Stability AI plans to invoke the pastiche exception under the Copyright [7], Designs and Patents Act 1988 [4] [7], arguing that its outputs qualify as fair dealing due to their transformative nature [7].
The case has also introduced new allegations regarding Stability AI’s potential to produce child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and misuse Getty’s watermark on AI-generated images [4], which the judge advised Getty to address separately [4]. Additionally, the trial may explore the implications of the UK’s post-Brexit copyright laws [4], particularly regarding data mining and the commercial use of AI-generated content [4]. Stability AI trained its model using the LAION-5B dataset [4], which consists of billions of images released under a Creative Commons license [4]. The legal complexities arise from the fact that while Stability AI’s model generates images with structural similarities to copyrighted works [4], it does not store the original images [4]. The UK Copyright [3] [4] [7], Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows for incidental copies [4], which could complicate the case [4].
Jurisdictional questions have also been raised, as Stability AI contends that key development activities occurred outside the UK [7], specifically on servers operated by Amazon in the US [1], which could potentially absolve it of liability under UK copyright law [7]. The High Court has indicated that there is some support for this position [7], but it will allow Getty the opportunity to challenge this at trial [7]. Stability AI has implemented measures to prevent the generation of synthetic outputs from the prompts in question [3], limiting the relief Getty could seek [3]. The company also withdrew its claim regarding database rights [3], which was closely tied to its copyright allegations [3].
The outcome of this case could have broader implications for the relationship between AI developers and content creators [7], particularly regarding licensing practices [7]. Legal experts highlight the challenges faced by copyright holders in proving misuse of their works in the context of AI [3], raising concerns for smaller content creators who may struggle to protect their rights [3]. The UK government is currently navigating a complex landscape of lobbying from both sectors [7], aiming to balance support for creative industries with the need for AI innovation [7]. Previous attempts to extend exceptions for text and data mining to facilitate AI development faced significant pushback from content creators [7], leading to stalled initiatives [7].
In addition to the UK case [2], Getty’s US division has filed a separate lawsuit against Stability AI for trademark and copyright infringement [2], seeking substantial damages for the alleged unauthorized use of copyrighted images [2]. Stability AI is also facing a lawsuit from a group of visual artists for copyright infringement [2], alongside Midjourney and DeviantArt [2]. The potential for differing legal interpretations across jurisdictions could impact the UK’s position as a hub for AI development [7]. A ruling favoring Stability AI could create a precedent that allows AI developers to utilize copyrighted materials without permission [7], complicating licensing negotiations and potentially necessitating legislative reforms to address these challenges [7]. The High Court’s decision will be closely monitored by stakeholders across the AI and copyright sectors [7], as it may set important precedents for future interactions between technology and intellectual property law [7].
Conclusion
The legal battle between Getty Images and Stability AI is poised to reshape the landscape of copyright licensing in AI. The case’s outcome could influence legislative reforms, affect the UK’s appeal as an AI development hub, and set precedents for future interactions between AI technology and intellectual property law [7]. Stakeholders across the AI and copyright sectors are closely watching the proceedings, as the implications could extend beyond the UK, affecting global practices in AI development and copyright protection.
References
[1] https://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/business/20250626/getty-drops-copyright-allegations-uk-lawsuit-against-stability-ai
[2] https://techcrunch.com/2025/06/25/getty-drops-key-copyright-claims-against-stability-ai-but-uk-lawsuit-continues/
[3] https://www.pinsentmasons.com/en-gb/out-law/news/getty-images-stability-ai-copyright-claims-dropped
[4] https://www.medianama.com/2025/06/223-getty-images-vs-stability-ai-lawsuit/
[5] https://legal.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/getty-images-drops-copyright-claims-against-stability-ai-in-landmark-lawsuit/122080697
[6] https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/law-order/3482055-getty-images-alters-strategy-in-ai-copyright-case-against-stability-ai
[7] https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/analysis/getty-images-v-stability-ai-implications-copyright-law-licensing
