PayAuthorscom

News

AI copyright news, graded by source

Court rulings, company filings and allegations in the copyright cases against AI companies and pirate libraries, over books, articles, music, images, video and code. Checked for new filings every three hours; items are posted after review, so some appear later. Get these by e-mail · Court filings, free to read

Each item is graded by its source: a court’s ruling or order; a company’s own filing about itself; a defendant’s filing arguing its side; a plaintiffs’ filing; the claims in a complaint (allegation); or press reporting.

What the labels mean

Get these updates by e-mail

For all news.

How the e-mails work

Uses the search, kind and company you set above (not the month or sort). As we post means within about 15 minutes of a new item; digests go out in the morning, U.S. Central time, weekly on Mondays, and only when something new matches. Updates start right away, and every e-mail has a one-click unsubscribe. If you tick Catch me up, the earlier items that match also come two a day, oldest first, each morning until you are up to date; you can stop that alone from any e-mail. Someone you invite gets one e-mail asking them to accept, and nothing more unless they do; we don’t tell them who invited them. Privacy.

Court rulingAugust 12, 2024Andersen v. Stability AI Ltd. · N.D. Cal., No. 3:23-cv-00201-WHO

Judge Orrick lets artists' copyright claims, including induced infringement, proceed against Stability AI, Midjourney, DeviantArt and Runway, and dismisses the DMCA claims for good

Ruling on motions to dismiss the first amended complaint, which added Runway AI and seven new artist plaintiffs, Judge William H. Orrick on Aug. 12, 2024 denied every defendant's motion to dismiss the Copyright Act claims. He allowed the theory that Stability and Runway induce infringement by distributing Stable Diffusion, holding that whether the model works in a way that necessarily invokes copies of the plaintiffs' works, as they allege, will be tested on the evidence. He denied Midjourney's motion against the Lanham Act false endorsement and trade dress claims, which rest on a list of about 4,700 artists' names that Midjourney's CEO posted on Discord and on the use of artists' names as prompts. He dismissed the DMCA § 1202 claims against all defendants with prejudice, finding no plausible allegation that any output or copy was identical to a plaintiff's work or that false CMI was provided with intent to enable infringement. He dismissed the unjust enrichment claims as preempted, with one last chance to amend, and dismissed the breach of contract claims against DeviantArt with prejudice. The copyright claims then went into discovery, which continues in 2026.

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motions to Dismiss First Amended Complaint, Dkt. 223 (RECAP) ↗Copyright Alliance analysis ↗

Loading the rest of the news…

What the labels mean

Every item says what kind of source it rests on. A court ruling or order is the court's own statement. A company filing is what a defendant says about itself. A government filing is a statement by a government agency that is not a party to the case, such as a statement of interest; it is the government's position, not a ruling. An allegation is what a complaint or motion claims and has not been decided. Reported means press reporting we have not confirmed from the primary document. Summaries are our own; follow the links for the source.

This page is general information, not legal advice. An allegation is not a finding. Whether any of this matters for a particular work or claim is a question for a lawyer.