A UK court has ruled that Getty Images' copyright dispute against leading artificial intelligence (AI) company Stability AI can move on to trial.

Dismissing Stable Diffusion creators contentions against the lawsuit, the court found merit in Getty's insistence that its copyright materials were used to train the company's AI models.

<h2>Stability AI vs Getty Images: The case</h2>

Getty Images has sued Stability AI, a competitor of the popular OpenAI, over the use of its copyrighted content. The US stock image provider alleges that Stability scrapped millions of its images online to train its image generation tool, called Stable Diffusion.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/ancestry-website-23andme-confirms-recent-data-breach-affected-69-million-users-666347">Ancestry website 23andMe confirms recent data breach affected 6.9 million users&nbsp;</a>

Stability AI, which is valued at $1 billion (£790 million), attempted to have the case brought by Getty Images dismissed. It contended that its models were largely trained in Munich — by a team from Munich University, and not in the UK. This, it said, meant that the case should not be held in a British court.

"I am confident that no Stability employee based in the UK has ever worked on developing or training Stable Diffusion," said Stability CEO Emad Mostaque, as reported by the Telegraph.

<h2>Judge's decision</h2>

Casting doubt on Stability AI's claims, Justice Joanna Smith, as per the Telegraph report, suggested that evidence provided by Mostague may be "inaccurate, or incomplete".

"These documents raise the spectre that Mr Mostaque’s evidence is either inaccurate or incomplete; at the very least they suggest a conflict of evidence."

"The apparent inconsistencies between Mr Mostaque's evidence and other available evidence casts doubt over the credibility of his statements generally," read Judge Smith's judgement.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/barclay-family-reclaims-telegraph-newspaper-after-abu-dhabi-aids-with-debt-repayment-666339">Barclay family reclaims Telegraph newspaper after Abu Dhabi aids with debt repayment</a>

Smith said that previous comments by the Stability CEO made during media appearances and YouTube interviews warrant a further investigation. She said that because of "unanswered questions" a full trial is needed, and that "Disclosure may establish that Mr Mostaque’s evidence is unimpeachable."

In a 2022 interview, Mostaque said that the company "fast-tracked" residency applications of Ukrainian and Russian developers to allow them to come to the UK.&nbsp;

Accusing Getty Images of "kicking up dust", Stability AI argued that the developers may have been working on other projects. It further said that the evidence provided by the stock image provider&nbsp;was "speculative".

(With inputs from agencies)

A UK court has ruled that Getty Images' copyright dispute against leading artificial intelligence (AI) company Stability AI can move on to trial. Dismissing Stable Diffusion creators contentions against the lawsuit, the court found merit in Getty's insistence that its copyright materials were used to train the company's AI models.

A UK court has ruled that Getty Images' copyright dispute against leading artificial intelligence (AI) company Stability AI can move on to trial. Dismissing Stable Diffusion creators contentions against the lawsuit, the court found merit in Getty's insistence that its copyright materials were used to train the company's AI models. Stability AI vs Getty Images: The case Getty Images has sued Stability AI, a competitor of the popular OpenAI, over the use of its copyrighted content. The US stock image provider alleges that Stability scrapped millions of its images online to train its image generation tool, called Stable Diffusion. Also read | Ancestry website 23andMe confirms recent data breach affected 6.9 million users Stability AI, which is valued at $1 billion (£790 million), attempted to have the case brought by Getty Images dismissed. It contended that its models were largely trained in Munich — by a team from Munich University, and not in the UK. This, it said, meant that the case should not be held in a British court. "I am confident that no Stability employee based in the UK has ever worked on developing or training Stable Diffusion," said Stability CEO Emad Mostaque, as reported by the Telegraph. Judge's decision Casting doubt on Stability AI's claims, Justice Joanna Smith, as per the Telegraph report, suggested that evidence provided by Mostague may be "inaccurate, or incomplete". "These documents raise the spectre that Mr Mostaque’s evidence is either inaccurate or incomplete; at the very least they suggest a conflict of evidence." "The apparent inconsistencies between Mr Mostaque's evidence and other available evidence casts doubt over the credibility of his statements generally," read Judge Smith's judgement. Also read | Barclay family reclaims Telegraph newspaper after Abu Dhabi aids with debt repayment Smith said that previous comments by the Stability CEO made during media appearances and YouTube interviews warrant a further investigation. She said that because of "unanswered questions" a full trial is needed, and that "Disclosure may establish that Mr Mostaque’s evidence is unimpeachable." In a 2022 interview, Mostaque said that the company "fast-tracked" residency applications of Ukrainian and Russian developers to allow them to come to the UK. Accusing Getty Images of "kicking up dust", Stability AI argued that the developers may have been working on other projects. It further said that the evidence provided by the stock image provider was "speculative". (With inputs from agencies)

Landmark Stability AI vs Getty Images copyright lawsuit to move ahead to trial

A group of music publishers have filed a lawsuit against Elon Musk's Twitter. The case filed in a federal court in Nashville, Tennessee, accuses the social media giant of fueling its business with numerous copyright music infringements.

<h2>The lawsuit against Twitter</h2>

Seventeen publishers, including Sony Music Publishing, BMG Rights Management, and Universal Music Publishing Group, have accused Twitter of facilitating numerous copyright violations by allowing users to post music without obtaining the necessary licenses.

As per an AFP report quoting&nbsp;National Music Publishers' Association (NMPA) CEO David Israelite, Twitter is the only major social media platform that has completely refused to license the millions of songs available on its service. He claims that Twitter is well aware that music is leaked, released, and streamed by billions of people daily on its platform.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/france-requests-musk-to-set-up-tesla-factory-in-country-weeks-after-threatening-twitter-with-ban-604542">France requests Musk to set up Tesla factory in country weeks after threatening Twitter with ban</a>

"Twitter stands alone as the largest social media platform that has completely refused to license the millions of songs on its service," said Israelite in reply to AFP.

"Twitter knows full-well that music is leaked, launched, and streamed by billions of people every day on its platform."

<h2>What do the complainants want?</h2>

As per a Reuters report, the publishers are seeking more than $250 million in damages for the alleged infringement of almost 1,700 copyrights.

The lawsuit claims that Twitter's handling of copyright complaints has not improved since Elon Musk's acquisition of the company in late 2022 for $44 billion.&nbsp;

It further argues that Twitter's internal affairs related to this issue are in "disarray".

"On the contrary, Twitter's internal affairs regarding matters pertinent to this case are in disarray," argues the lawsuit.

<h2>Music infringement and other platforms</h2>

In contrast to Twitter, other major platforms such as TikTok, Facebook, and YouTube properly license music from the publishers.&nbsp;

The publishers argue that Twitter actively encourages user infringement, which in turn boosts engagement and advertising revenues for the platform, giving it an unfair advantage over competitors who pay for music licenses.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-lawmakers-want-new-law-to-guard-tiktok-user-data-604492">US: Lawmakers want new law to guard TikTok user data</a>

"Twitter refuses to stop the rampant infringement of copyrighted music... because it knows that the Twitter platform is more popular and profitable if Twitter allows such infringement."

Allowing unlicensed music to be used in Twitter posts gives the platform an edge over competitors such as TikTok, Instagram and YouTube that pay fees to music publishers, speculates the lawsuit.

"Twitter fuels its business with countless infringing copies of musical compositions," alleges the suit.

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

A group of music publishers have filed a lawsuit against Elon Musk's Twitter. The case filed in a federal court in Nashville, Tennessee, accuses the social media giant of fueling its business with numerous copyright music infringements.

A group of music publishers have filed a lawsuit against Elon Musk's Twitter. The case filed in a federal court in Nashville, Tennessee, accuses the social media giant of fueling its business with numerous copyright music infringements. The lawsuit against Twitter Seventeen publishers, including Sony Music Publishing, BMG Rights Management, and Universal Music Publishing Group, have accused Twitter of facilitating numerous copyright violations by allowing users to post music without obtaining the necessary licenses. As per an AFP report quoting National Music Publishers' Association (NMPA) CEO David Israelite, Twitter is the only major social media platform that has completely refused to license the millions of songs available on its service. He claims that Twitter is well aware that music is leaked, released, and streamed by billions of people daily on its platform. Also read | France requests Musk to set up Tesla factory in country weeks after threatening Twitter with ban "Twitter stands alone as the largest social media platform that has completely refused to license the millions of songs on its service," said Israelite in reply to AFP. "Twitter knows full-well that music is leaked, launched, and streamed by billions of people every day on its platform." What do the complainants want? As per a Reuters report, the publishers are seeking more than $250 million in damages for the alleged infringement of almost 1,700 copyrights. The lawsuit claims that Twitter's handling of copyright complaints has not improved since Elon Musk's acquisition of the company in late 2022 for $44 billion. It further argues that Twitter's internal affairs related to this issue are in "disarray". "On the contrary, Twitter's internal affairs regarding matters pertinent to this case are in disarray," argues the lawsuit. Music infringement and other platforms In contrast to Twitter, other major platforms such as TikTok, Facebook, and YouTube properly license music from the publishers. The publishers argue that Twitter actively encourages user infringement, which in turn boosts engagement and advertising revenues for the platform, giving it an unfair advantage over competitors who pay for music licenses. Also read | US: Lawmakers want new law to guard TikTok user data "Twitter refuses to stop the rampant infringement of copyrighted music... because it knows that the Twitter platform is more popular and profitable if Twitter allows such infringement." Allowing unlicensed music to be used in Twitter posts gives the platform an edge over competitors such as TikTok, Instagram and YouTube that pay fees to music publishers, speculates the lawsuit. "Twitter fuels its business with countless infringing copies of musical compositions," alleges the suit. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

Music publishers sue Musk's Twitter for copyright infringement, and 'fueling its business' with stolen content

The film ‘Jugjugg Jeeyo’, which is a joint production of Viacom 18 Studios and Karan Johar's Dharma Production, was sued for copyright infringement by Ranchi-based writer Vishal Singh in May.

Now, a&nbsp;court in Ranchi has ordered its screening ahead of its release on June 24.

According to the latest reports, judge M C Jha&nbsp;will&nbsp;decide whether the film violates the Copyright Act or not after the screening. Karan Johar and other makers of the film are yet to react on the matter.

Singh had earlier claimed that his story titled ‘Punny Rani’ has similar content to the KJo's upcoming film and that the makers have used his content without giving any credit to him. He sought a stay on the release of the movie.

He also demanded a compensation of Rs 1.5 crore.&nbsp;

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/lifestyle/news-amber-heard-has-worlds-most-beautiful-face-according-to-science-489823" hreflang="en">Amber Heard has world's most beautiful face, according to science</a>

Helmed by Raj Mehta, 'JugJugg Jeeyo'&nbsp;stars Varun Dhawan, Anil Kapoor, Kiara Advani and Neetu Kapoor.

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iqlan_BUi2I" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>

The trailer of the Raj Mehta directorial recently released and left fans excited. It was&nbsp;packed with romance, family drama&nbsp;and emotions.&nbsp;

The film ‘Jugjugg Jeeyo’, which is a joint production of Viacom 18 Studios and Karan Johar's Dharma Production, was sued for copyright infringement by Ranchi-based writer Vishal Singh in May.

The film ‘Jugjugg Jeeyo’, which is a joint production of Viacom 18 Studios and Karan Johar's Dharma Production, was sued for copyright infringement by Ranchi-based writer Vishal Singh in May. Now, a court in Ranchi has ordered its screening ahead of its release on June 24. According to the latest reports, judge M C Jha will decide whether the film violates the Copyright Act or not after the screening. Karan Johar and other makers of the film are yet to react on the matter. Singh had earlier claimed that his story titled ‘Punny Rani’ has similar content to the KJo's upcoming film and that the makers have used his content without giving any credit to him. He sought a stay on the release of the movie. He also demanded a compensation of Rs 1.5 crore. Also read: Amber Heard has world's most beautiful face, according to science Helmed by Raj Mehta, 'JugJugg Jeeyo' stars Varun Dhawan, Anil Kapoor, Kiara Advani and Neetu Kapoor. The trailer of the Raj Mehta directorial recently released and left fans excited. It was packed with romance, family drama and emotions.

'JugJugg Jeeyo' copyright infringement case: Film to be screened in Ranchi court before release