header-logo header-logo

28 November 2025
Issue: 8141 / Categories: Legal News , Artificial intelligence , Intellectual property , Copyright , Technology
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: AI copyright clash

237026
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week

Getty alleged that Stable Diffusion was built from millions of its unlicensed photos, breaching copyright and trade marks. Mrs Justice Joanna Smith found no secondary copyright infringement because the model weights did not reproduce the works themselves, though early versions did infringe Getty’s trade marks by generating synthetic images with iStock watermarks.

For developers, the judgment offers relief: training abroad may avoid liability if models don’t store copies. For rightsholders, it underscores the evidential barriers and the need for transparency about datasets.

While Getty’s partial win brings limited clarity, the ruling signals the start—not the end—of the legal story on generative AI.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll