A landmark legal battle has begun in the UK High Court that could redefine the boundaries between copyright law and artificial intelligence innovation.
Stability AI, the London-based company behind the popular image generator Stable Diffusion, has warned that Getty Images’ copyright and trademark lawsuit poses “an overt threat” to the future of the generative AI industry.
Getty Images, one of the world’s largest and most influential photography agencies, alleges that Stability illegally used its vast database of copyrighted photographs to train its AI model — a claim the tech firm vehemently denies. At the heart of the case is the allegation that Stability’s technology outputs images that still bear Getty’s watermark, leading the agency to describe the result as tantamount to “sticking our trademark on pornography” and “AI rubbish”.
Lawyers for Getty argue that this is not a fight between art and innovation, but one about fair payment and responsible technology development. “The problem is when AI companies such as Stability want to use those works without payment,” said Lindsay Lane KC, representing Getty. “This was a bunch of tech geeks who were so excited by AI that they were indifferent to any of the dangers or problems it presents.”
Stability AI, whose board includes film director James Cameron, hit back by claiming Getty is using “fanciful” legal arguments and spending upwards of £10 million in an attempt to derail a technology it perceives as an existential threat to its own business model. The company also strongly rejected Getty’s separate allegation that it had trained on databases containing child sexual abuse material (CSAM), calling the claim “repugnant” and insisting it has robust safeguards in place to prevent abuse.
The case opens at a time of growing tension between generative AI firms and the creative industries, as photographers, musicians and writers warn that AI tools are increasingly trained on their work without consent or compensation. Recent campaigns backed by stars including Elton John and Dua Lipa have called for tighter copyright protections and regulatory reform.
In the UK, the debate has reached Westminster, where a proposed government policy would force copyright holders to opt out of having their material used to train AI models — a move widely criticised by creators and rights holders who argue that “opting in” should be the default.
“Getty Images, of course, recognises that the AI industry overall may be a force for good,” said Lane. “But that doesn’t justify allowing those developing AI models to ride roughshod over intellectual property rights.”
The trial, which is expected to last several weeks, will involve testimony from leading academics and AI experts, including specialists from the University of California, Berkeley and Germany’s University of Freiberg. More than 78,000 pages of evidence have been submitted, including examples of Getty-owned images allegedly used in the training process — such as portraits of Donald Glover, Jürgen Klopp and Christopher Nolan.
With the outcome likely to set precedent not just in the UK but globally, the case is being closely watched by tech companies, artists, and lawmakers alike. The stakes are high: a ruling in Getty’s favour could impose new restrictions on how AI companies source their training data, while a win for Stability could embolden the sector to continue training on publicly accessible materials.
Either way, the outcome will likely shape the future of content creation — and the fine line between inspiration, imitation, and intellectual property in the age of AI.
Read more:
London AI firm claims Getty copyright lawsuit is an ‘existential threat’ to generative tech industry