Class Action Filed Against Stability AI, Midjourney and DeviantArt for DMCA Violations, Right of Publicity Violations, UnlawfulCompetition, TOS Breach

Class Action Filed Against Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt for DMCA Violations, Right of Publicity Violations, Unlawful Competition, Breach of TOS

/PRNewswire/ -- Stability AI Ltd.; Stability AI, Inc.; Midjourney Inc.; and DeviantArt, Inc. have created products that infringe the rights of artists and...

www.prnewswire.com

Class Action Filed Against Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt f…

archived 15 Jan 2023 14:35:16 UTC

archive.ph

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 14, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- Stability AI Ltd.; Stability AI, Inc.; Midjourney Inc.; and DeviantArt, Inc. have created products that infringe the rights of artists and other creative individuals under the guise of alleged "artificial intelligence." The Joseph Saveri Law Firm, LLP—a leading class action firm with offices in California and New York—along with Matthew Butterick, and Lockridge, Grindal, Nauen P.L.L.P. have filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of a class of plaintiffs seeking compensation for damages caused by Stability AI, DeviantArt, and Midjourney, and an injunction to prevent future harms. The lawsuit alleges direct copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement related to forgeries, violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), violation of class members' rights of publicity, breach of contract related to the DeviantArt Terms of Service, and various violations of California's unfair competition laws.

As alleged in the Complaint, Stable Diffusion is an artificial intelligence product used by Stability AI, DeviantArt, and Midjourney in their AI image products. It was trained on billions of copyrighted images contained in the LAION-5B dataset, which were downloaded and used without compensation or consent from the artists. If Stable Diffusion and similar products are allowed to continue to operate as they do now, the foreseeable result is they will replace the very artists whose stolen works power these AI products with whom they are competing. AI image products are not just an infringement of artists' rights; whether they aim to or not, these products will eliminate "artist" as a viable career path. In addition to obtaining redress for the wrongful conduct, this lawsuit seeks to prevent that outcome and ensure these products follow the same rules as any other new technology that involves the use of massive amounts of intellectual property. If streaming music can be accomplished within the law, so can AI products.

"As burgeoning technology continues to change every aspect of the modern world, it's critical that we recognize and protect the rights of artists against unlawful theft and fraud," said Joseph Saveri, founder of the Joseph Saveri Law Firm, LLP. He continued, "This case represents a larger fight for preserving ownership rights for all artists and other creators."

"AI needs to be fair and ethical for everyone," said lawyer/programmer Matthew Butterick. "But Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt are appropriating the work of thousands of artists with no consent, no credit, and no compensation. As a lawyer who is also a longtime member of the visual-arts community, it's a pleasure to stand up on behalf of fellow artists and continue this essential conversation about how we the people want AI to coexist with human culture and creativity."

Since its founding in 2000, DeviantArt had grown to be a haven for artists of all stripes. A core aspect of participating in the DeviantArt community for artists is the practice of sharing digital images of their artwork. Today, DeviantArt bills itself as "the world's largest art community," hosting millions of images. At the same time, it offers DreamUp, a product that unlawfully infringes on the rights of its own art community. To add insult to injury, a large portion of the training data for Stable Diffusion—which powers DreamUp—was made up of images scraped from DeviantArt without permission from the artists that posted them.

For more information, please see our case page www.saverilawfirm.com/ai-art-generators-copyright-litigation and our case website stablediffusionlitigation.com.

ABOUT THE FIRMS

The Joseph Saveri Law Firm is one of the country's most acclaimed, successful boutique firms, specializing in antitrust, class actions, and complex litigation on behalf of national and international consumers, purchasers, and employees across diverse industries. For further information on our practice and accomplishments on behalf of our clients, please visit www.saverilawfirm.com or call us at (415) 423-1799.
Lockridge Grindal Nauen P.L.L.P. has served clients throughout the Midwest and in Washington, D.C. for more than 40 years. It has extensive experience in local, state, and federal government relations as well as antitrust, business, campaign finance, consumer, data breach, governmental, health care, employment, environmental, ERISA, intellectual property, real estate, securities, and tribal law litigation. For further information, please visit https://www.locklaw.com/.

ABOUT MATTHEW BUTTERICK

Matthew Butterick is a lawyer, programmer, designer, and writer. He has been professionally involved with open-source software since 1998. His books Typography for Lawyers (typographyforlawyers.com) and Practical Typography (practicaltypography.com) are relied on daily by lawyers and writers worldwide. For more information, please visit https://matthewbutterick.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Epoch]

It was fun while it lasted boys, can't wait for copyright law to ass rape these projects out of existence

 

[Sulla]

But stable diffusion is open source... What are they going to do, confiscate everyones harddrives?

 

[sum ting wong]

Can't wait for a bunch of boomer lawyers and judges too fuck up something they don't understand.

 

[Breadbassket]

But stable diffusion is open source... What are they going to do, confiscate everyones harddrives?

The only thing I can imagine people doing is using private companies to scan the webs and torrent downloads for StableDiffusion and take them down wherever they are found. It would be a similar process to how IP holders pay businesses to hunt down illegal torrent downloads and pull on the arm of the ISP to take action on it.

There isn't an organization currently to really fund such thorough long-term efforts though but that could potentially change in the future.

 

[74164978231]

God damn they are seriously MATI.

 

[HarveyMCR]

The lawsuit alleges direct copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement related to forgeries, violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), violation of class members' rights of publicity, breach of contract related to the DeviantArt Terms of Service, and various violations of California's unfair competition laws.

I would be very surprised if any of these claims are successful. AI is not just a simple collage machine. The outputs are novel and not direct copy’s of previous pieces of art.

 

[Jonah Hill poster]

It’s pretty ironic how the same people that are against A.I. generated art are the same ones that are being sued by people who thought they were also against it because it affects the lifestyle of artists all around the world.

 

[Sulla]

The only thing I can imagine people doing is using private companies to scan the webs and torrent downloads for StableDiffusion and take them down wherever they are found. It would be a similar process to how IP holders pay businesses to hunt down illegal torrent downloads and pull on the arm of the ISP to take action on it.

There isn't an organization currently to really fund such thorough long-term efforts though but that could potentially change in the future.

So in other words, even if this lawsuit won. Literally nothing is going to stop AI art.

Lol
Lmao

 

[Mr.Miyagi]

Can't wait for a bunch of boomer lawyers and judges too fuck up something they don't understand.

"So you're telling me that the computer is drawing the picture?"
"That's correct, Your Honor."
"Are you sure there's not a little man inside the computer box that's drawing it?"
"We're reasonably sure, Your Honor."

 

[Tom Myers]

It was fun while it lasted boys, can't wait for copyright law to ass rape these projects out of existence

There will be a settlement and the copyright holders will get 5 dollars for their work.

 

[Niggergante]

This will be entertaining to follow but absolutely nothing is going to come of it.

 

[Weebburner]

the only argument i can see how copyright violation using AI art is through claiming the images fed to the AI to generate art could be protected in some way. For exemple you cant feed them copyright work without asking or paying the artist before feeding the info to the AI. This would just means that AI project would be using mostly copyright free material for its learning and would probably not stop it in anyway.

 

[TowinKarz]

the only argument i can see how copyright violation using AI art is through claiming the images fed to the AI to generate art could be protected in some way. For exemple you cant feed them copyright work without asking or paying the artist before feeding the info to the AI. This would just means that AI project would be using mostly copyright free material for its learning and would probably not stop it in anyway.

Except, if the work that comes out the other end is sufficiently 'transformative' then fair use covers you for feeding copyrighted images in one end, doesn't it?

IANAL - but, I don't see any difference between a machine being fed a source image and a regular meat-and-bone artist being "inspired" by same.

All these suits seem to seek a way to criminalize the act of examining a work in the first place with intent to use it as an influence, and that's just silly.

 

[Monkey Pink]

Thanks, Karla Ortiz!

 

[AirdropShitposts]

said Joseph Saveri, founder of the Joseph Saveri Law Firm, LLP

Never would have guessed.

This is the same guy who is trying to sue to stop Microsoft from buying Activision Blizzard from a few weeks ago: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rel...zzard-by-microsoft-corporation-301707603.html

"As the video game industry continues to grow and evolve, it's critical that we protect the market from monopolistic mergers that will harm consumers in the long run. I am grateful to the gaming consumers supporting this historic lawsuit," said Joseph Saveri of the Joseph Saveri Law Firm. He continued, "This case represents a necessary step in preserving competition in the video game industry and protecting the consumer benefits and innovations that competition brings."

"Nothing has been as destructive to the free enterprise system as the mega-mergers of the last two to three decades. They destroy jobs; they raise prices; they cause quality to diminish and innovation to be stifled. In this case, one of the largest companies in the world is trying to eliminate its significant rival in the game industry instead of competing," said Joseph Alioto of the Alioto Law Firm. He continued, "In addition, we will be attacking the proposed $3 billion dollar reverse-termination payment to Activision, if this acquisition is stopped, which it will be. The $3 billion is hush money and it's a new effort in these cases to try and keep the acquired company silent."

That lawsuit is on behalf of GAMERS:

 

[Secret Messenger]

Copyright is evil. I would rather live in an A.I dystopia than give any power to companies that enforce DMCA.

 

[Colon capital V]

This thread should be tagged as "War" because my god is this gonna be a fucking warzone over what is or isn't "ownership" and that other copyright lawshit.

 

[Starved Artist]

I really need to get off my ass and make a "who's behind this post" image with mickey mouse sticking out. I swear, Disney hates fair use. Note. I'm only singling out disney because they fucking own every piece of media not owned by the Jews of Hollywood.

 

[The Ugly One]

The lawsuit alleges direct copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement related to forgeries, violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), violation of class members' rights of publicity, breach of contract related to the DeviantArt Terms of Service, and various violations of California's unfair competition laws.

I would be very surprised if any of these claims are successful. AI is not just a simple collage machine. The outputs are novel and not direct copy’s of previous pieces of art.

Copyright covers derived works, not just copies.

An AI can produce copies of items in the training set, too, which is why Github is also being sued over Copilot.

IANAL - but, I don't see any difference between a machine being fed a source image and a regular meat-and-bone artist being "inspired" by same.

Also IANAL, but George Harrison lost when the Bangles sued him. Also, the difference between humans and machines is machines just do mathematical operations based on input data.

It's a fuckton of math for really complex AIs with a lot of training data. But that's not at all what brains do.