Introduction
In 2023, a significant legal battle emerged in the art and technology sectors when visual artists Sarah Andersen, Kelly McKernan [2], and Karla Ortiz filed a class action lawsuit against several AI companies [2]. The artists claimed that these companies’ AI models infringed on copyright laws by using their artwork in training datasets [2]. This case highlights the ongoing tension between technological advancement and intellectual property rights.
Description
In 2023, visual artists Sarah Andersen [2], Kelly McKernan [2], and Karla Ortiz initiated a class action lawsuit against multiple AI companies [2], alleging that the companies’ AI models infringed copyright law by utilizing their artwork in training datasets [2]. The Second Amended Complaint filed by Andersen omits the previously dismissed unjust enrichment and breach of contract claims while retaining the DMCA CMI claims that were dismissed with prejudice by Judge William Orrick [1]. Judge Tigar has certified the interpretation of these DMCA CMI claims for interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit [1].
In August 2024 [2], Judge Orrick ruled that the artists’ copyright claims could proceed, determining that the direct infringement claims were valid and rejecting the motion to dismiss the induced infringement claims [2]. He distinguished the AI models from VCRs, noting that [2], unlike VCRs [2], which can have non-infringing uses [2], the AI models were alleged to operate in a manner that inherently infringes on copyrighted works [2]. This ruling likely allowed the Plaintiffs to maintain the DMCA claims in the Second Amended Complaint in anticipation of a potential change in law resulting from the Ninth Circuit appeal [1].
Conclusion
The lawsuit brought by Andersen, McKernan [2], and Ortiz against AI companies underscores the complex intersection of art, technology, and law [1]. Judge Orrick’s decision to allow the copyright claims to proceed marks a pivotal moment in the legal discourse surrounding AI and copyright infringement. The outcome of this case, particularly the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation of the DMCA CMI claims, could have far-reaching implications for both artists and AI developers, potentially reshaping the legal landscape regarding the use of copyrighted material in AI training datasets.
References
[1] https://chatgptiseatingtheworld.com/2024/11/05/sarah-andersen-plaintiffs-file-2d-amended-complaint-which-still-includes-dmca-cmi-claims-dismissed-by-judge-orrick/
[2] https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/artists-copyright-infringement-suit-6066715/
