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

On behalf of well-known authors like John Grisham, Jonathan Franzen, George Saunders, Jodi Picoult, and "Game of Thrones" author George R.R. Martin, a trade association for American authors has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI in the Manhattan federal court. The claim states that the company illegally used their works to train its well-known artificial intelligence-based chatbot ChatGPT.

The Authors Guild's proposed class-action lawsuit, which was filed late on Tuesday, joins a number of other lawsuits from authors, owners of open-source software, and visual artists against generative AI companies. Similar legal actions about the data used to train Meta Platforms and Stability AI's AI systems are ongoing in addition to those against Microsoft-backed OpenAI.

According to OpenAI and other AI defendants, using training data that was downloaded from the internet satisfies the requirements of fair use under American copyright law.

Reuters quoted a spokeswoman for OpenAI said that the business respects the rights of authors and is “having productive conversations with many creators around the world, including the Authors Guild."

As per a statement released by the Authors Guild CEO on Wednesday, in order to "preserve our literature," authors "must have the ability to control whether and how their works are used by generative AI."

The Authors Guild's lawsuit said that the text from the authors' books that may have been obtained from unauthorised online "pirate" book repositories was included in the datasets used to train OpenAI's&nbsp;language model to respond to human requests.

According to the complaint, ChatGPT produced accurate book summaries for the authors when asked, demonstrating that its database contains their work.

Additionally, it expressed growing worries that writers would be displaced by ChatGPT and other similar systems that "generate low-quality ebooks, impersonating authors and displacing human-authored books."

(With inputs from Reuters)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

On behalf of well-known authors like John Grisham, Jonathan Franzen, George Saunders, Jodi Picoult, and "Game of Thrones" author George R.R. Martin, a trade association for American authors has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI in the Manhattan federal court.

On behalf of well-known authors like John Grisham, Jonathan Franzen, George Saunders, Jodi Picoult, and "Game of Thrones" author George R.R. Martin, a trade association for American authors has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI in the Manhattan federal court. The claim states that the company illegally used their works to train its well-known artificial intelligence-based chatbot ChatGPT. The Authors Guild's proposed class-action lawsuit, which was filed late on Tuesday, joins a number of other lawsuits from authors, owners of open-source software, and visual artists against generative AI companies. Similar legal actions about the data used to train Meta Platforms and Stability AI's AI systems are ongoing in addition to those against Microsoft-backed OpenAI. According to OpenAI and other AI defendants, using training data that was downloaded from the internet satisfies the requirements of fair use under American copyright law. Reuters quoted a spokeswoman for OpenAI said that the business respects the rights of authors and is “having productive conversations with many creators around the world, including the Authors Guild." As per a statement released by the Authors Guild CEO on Wednesday, in order to "preserve our literature," authors "must have the ability to control whether and how their works are used by generative AI." The Authors Guild's lawsuit said that the text from the authors' books that may have been obtained from unauthorised online "pirate" book repositories was included in the datasets used to train OpenAI's language model to respond to human requests. According to the complaint, ChatGPT produced accurate book summaries for the authors when asked, demonstrating that its database contains their work. Additionally, it expressed growing worries that writers would be displaced by ChatGPT and other similar systems that "generate low-quality ebooks, impersonating authors and displacing human-authored books." (With inputs from Reuters) WATCH WION LIVE HERE

John Grisham and other eminent US authors accuse OpenAI for copyright violation

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

Indian filmmaker Suneel Darshan, famed for films like 'Inteqam' and 'Andaaz,' has filed a FIR against Google, its CEO, Sundar Pichai, and numerous other Google workers, alleging copyright violations of his 2017 directorial 'Ek Haseena Thi Ek Deewana Tha' on YouTube.

Darshan claims that, despite the fact that he did not upload the film anywhere or sell it to anyone, it is being profited from by many YouTube channels, and that Google has refused to remove the film from those channels.

Infringement of Sections 51, 63, and 69 of the Copyright Act of 1957, according to his FIR filed with the MIDC Police Station in Andheri East.&nbsp;

He said: "My faith and belief in the advancement of technology are implicit, but the infringement of my rights is a cause of grave concern." 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-awards-padma-bhushan-to-googles-sundar-pichai-and-microsofts-satya-nadella-447531">Also read | FIR against Google CEO Sundar Pichai, five others over film piracy on YouTube</a>

He added: "My entire copyrighted movie, apart from its songs and sequences from it, has been uploaded and monetised, and I have helplessly watched such illegal acts."

In the complaint, Google LLC, YouTube LLC, Google India Ltd., Pichai, and others were mentioned.

Sections 51, 63, and 69 of the Copyright Act, 1957, which deal with copyright infringement, were used to record the offence.

When contacted for comment, a Google spokesperson in India stated that the company relies on copyright owners to notify it of unauthorised uploads and that it provides them with "rights management tools, such as YouTube's Content ID system, which gives rights holders an automated way to identify, block, promote, and even make money from uploads of their content."&nbsp; 
 
Watch: Google CEO Sundar Pichai to be questioned in privacy lawsuit

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/google-ceo-sundar-pichai-to-be-questioned-in-privacy-lawsuit-440842/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

"When a copyright holder notifies us of a video that infringes their copyright, we remove the content promptly in accordance with the law, and terminate the accounts of users with multiple copyright strikes," the spokesperson added.

(With inputs from agencies)

Indian filmmaker Suneel Darshan, famed for films like 'Inteqam' and 'Andaaz,' has filed a FIR against Google, its CEO, Sundar Pichai, and numerous other Google workers, alleging copyright violations of his 2017 directorial 'Ek Haseena Thi Ek Deewana Tha' on YouTube.

Indian filmmaker Suneel Darshan, famed for films like 'Inteqam' and 'Andaaz,' has filed a FIR against Google, its CEO, Sundar Pichai, and numerous other Google workers, alleging copyright violations of his 2017 directorial 'Ek Haseena Thi Ek Deewana Tha' on YouTube. Darshan claims that, despite the fact that he did not upload the film anywhere or sell it to anyone, it is being profited from by many YouTube channels, and that Google has refused to remove the film from those channels. Infringement of Sections 51, 63, and 69 of the Copyright Act of 1957, according to his FIR filed with the MIDC Police Station in Andheri East. He said: "My faith and belief in the advancement of technology are implicit, but the infringement of my rights is a cause of grave concern." Also read | FIR against Google CEO Sundar Pichai, five others over film piracy on YouTube He added: "My entire copyrighted movie, apart from its songs and sequences from it, has been uploaded and monetised, and I have helplessly watched such illegal acts." In the complaint, Google LLC, YouTube LLC, Google India Ltd., Pichai, and others were mentioned. Sections 51, 63, and 69 of the Copyright Act, 1957, which deal with copyright infringement, were used to record the offence. When contacted for comment, a Google spokesperson in India stated that the company relies on copyright owners to notify it of unauthorised uploads and that it provides them with "rights management tools, such as YouTube's Content ID system, which gives rights holders an automated way to identify, block, promote, and even make money from uploads of their content." Watch: Google CEO Sundar Pichai to be questioned in privacy lawsuit "When a copyright holder notifies us of a video that infringes their copyright, we remove the content promptly in accordance with the law, and terminate the accounts of users with multiple copyright strikes," the spokesperson added. (With inputs from agencies)

FIR against Google CEO Sundar Pichai, five others over film piracy on YouTube