AI公司在照片社版权索赔案中赢得高院裁决

AI公司在照片社版权索赔案中赢得高院裁决

2025-11-20Technology
--:--
--:--
卿姐
早上好,norris。今天是11月20日,星期四,上午8点01分。我是卿姐,欢迎收听专为您打造的 Goose Pod。
李白
吾乃李白!今日,我等将共论那“AI公司在照片社版权索赔案中赢得高院裁决”之事,此中玄机,真可谓“大道如青天,我独不得出”啊!
卿姐
确实如此。最近,英国高等法院的一项判决引起了轩然大波。人工智能公司Stability AI在与知名图片社Getty Images的版权诉讼中,核心的版权侵权指控被驳回,可以说是在法律层面取得了重大胜利。
李白
胜耶?非也!此乃“玉盘珍羞直万钱”之虚名耳!法院虽赦其“窃画”之罪,却判其“盗印”之实——因其生成图像时,竟带有Getty的水印,此乃商标侵权,昭然若揭!可见其行,终非光明磊落。
卿姐
是的,这正是案件的复杂之处。判决承认了部分商标侵权,但驳回了更核心的版权问题。这起案件的背后,是Stability AI涉嫌使用了数百万张Getty的受版权保护图片来训练其AI模型,这引发了关于创新与创作者权益的深刻讨论。
李白
此番交锋,堪比“银鞍照白马,飒沓如流星”之剑客对决!然观近日Perplexity与Getty握手言和,授权为盟,方为正道。AI江湖欲行稳致远,岂能绕开“版权”这座雄关?当效仿此举,共创共生。
卿姐
说得对。这次诉讼被视为人工智能与知识产权领域的里程碑。Getty指控Stability AI抓取了超过1200万张图片用于训练,认为这是对其版权的直接侵犯,甚至称这场官司关乎整个创意产业的生死存亡。
李白
“拔剑四顾心茫然”!Getty之困,在于其剑虽利,却未能指出敌身在何方。Stability AI辩称,其AI模型的训练皆在英国境外完成,如同飞鸿踏雪,踪迹难寻。致使Getty空有屠龙技,却难斩境外之龙。
卿姐
这个比喻很形象。由于Getty无法提供模型训练发生在英国境内的确凿证据,他们不得不撤回了主要的版权侵权指控。这也凸显了跨国AI公司在法律适用上的复杂性,为监管带来了新的挑战。
李白
哈哈,英吉利之法,倒也奇特!竟有“计算机生成作品”之说,承认无“人”之作亦可受庇护。此非“天地一指,万物一马”之道耶?视机器为造物主,倒是颇有几分道家无为之意。
卿姐
这确实是英国法律一个独特之处。早在1988年的《版权法》中就有所规定,这与美国坚持“人类作者”为核心的原则截然不同。这种法律框架的差异,也让这场发生在英国的诉讼变得更加引人注目和具有开创性。
卿姐
案件的核心冲突,其实是两大阵营的对峙:一方是代表创作者利益的创意产业,他们认为AI的训练方式无异于“盗窃”;另一方则是追求技术突破的AI开发者,他们渴望更自由的数据访问权限。
李白
窃?“窃钩者诛,窃国者侯”!此非窃,乃是豪夺!连乐坛巨擘Elton John亦怒斥此举为“政府纵容盗窃”。“安能摧眉折腰事权贵”,我辈风骨,岂容机器算法肆意践踏!艺术之魂,不容亵渎!
卿姐
我完全理解这份激愤。英国政府也因此陷入两难,他们既希望将英国打造成AI发展的热土,吸引创新,又不能忽视创意产业的巨大贡献和合理诉求。如何在这两者之间找到一个平衡点,是他们面临的巨大考验。
李白
平衡?“抽刀断水水更流”!所谓平衡,不过是和光同尘之辞。关键在于是否设立“文本与数据挖掘”之豁免。若无此例外,则AI取用数据需得授权,方为正途;若有,则需明示“退出”之法,予创作者选择之权。
卿姐
这次判决无疑对版权所有者是一次打击。它暴露了一个法律漏洞:只要AI公司在海外完成模型训练,英国的创作者可能就难以追责。这对于每年为英国经济贡献1240亿英镑的创意产业来说,是一个巨大的潜在威胁。
李白
“蜀道之难,难于上青天”!此判决为海外AI公司洞开一方便之门,却令本土创作者如履薄冰。然天不绝人之路,贵族院已有应对之策,要求海外AI若想在英伦售卖其产品,便需遵从此地之法度。
卿姐
是的,Kidron女男爵提出的修正案就像一道及时的防线,要求在英国销售产品的海外AI公司必须尊重英国的版权法。这在一定程度上保护了创作者的权益,也显示出法律正在努力跟上技术的脚步,寻求新的规制方法。
卿姐
尽管此次判决已定,但法律的博弈远未结束。Getty已表示,他们在美国还有并行的诉讼,并且会利用这次英国的裁决作为先例,继续为自己的权益抗争。可见这场风波还将持续。
李白
“长风破浪会有时,直挂云帆济沧海”!此案虽结,而道法之争未央。英伦之AI法案亦将迟至2026年方能面世。此间种种变数,恰如云海翻腾,未来图景,尚在未定之天。
卿姐
这确实是一场关乎科技、法律与艺术未来的里程碑式对决。感谢收听Goose Pod,我们明天再会。
李白
“且放白鹿青崖间,须行即骑访名山”。明日再与君痛饮,共论天下事!再会!

英国高院在AI公司Stability AI与Getty Images的版权案中,驳回了核心版权侵权指控,但认定存在商标侵权。此判决突显了AI训练数据与创作者权益的冲突,以及跨国AI公司在法律适用上的复杂性,为科技与知识产权的未来发展带来深远影响。

AI firm wins high court ruling after photo agency’s copyright claim

Read original at The Guardian

A London-based artificial intelligence firm has won a landmark high court case examining the legality of AI models using vast troves of copyrighted data without permission.Stability AI, whose directors include the Oscar-winning film-maker behind Avatar, James Cameron, successfully resisted a claim from Getty Images that it had infringed the international photo agency’s copyright.

The ruling is seen as a blow to copyright owners’ exclusive right to reap the rewards of their work, with one senior lawyer, Rebecca Newman, a legal director at Addleshaw Goddard, warning it means “the UK’s secondary copyright regime is not strong enough to protect its creators”.There was evidence that Getty’s images were used to train Stability’s model, which allows users to generate images with text prompts.

Stability was also found to have infringed Getty’s trademarks in some cases.The judge, Mrs Justice Joanna Smith, said the question of where to strike the balance between the interests of the creative industries on one side and the AI industry on the other was “of very real societal importance”. But she was only able to rule on relatively narrow claims after Getty had to withdraw parts of its case during the trial this summer.

Getty Images sued Stability AI for infringement of its intellectual property, alleging the AI company was “completely indifferent to what they fed into the training data” and scraped and copied millions of its images.The judgment comes amid a row over how the Labour government should legislate on the issue of copyright and AI, with artists and authors including Elton John, Kate Bush, Dua Lipa and Kazuo Ishiguro lobbying for protection.

Meanwhile, tech companies are calling for wide access to copyrighted content to allow them to build the most powerful and effective generative AI systems.The government is consulting on copyright and AI and has said: “Uncertainty over how our copyright framework operates is holding back growth for our AI and creative industries.

That cannot continue.”It is looking at whether to introduce a “text and data mining exception” into UK copyright law, which would allow copyright works to be used to train AI models in the UK unless the rights holder opts their works out of such training, said lawyers at Mishcon de Reya who have been following the issue.

Getty had to drop its original copyright claim as there was no evidence the training took place in the UK. But it continued with its suit claiming Stability was still using within its systems copies of its visual assets, which it called the “lifeblood” of its business. It claimed Stability AI had infringed its trademarks because some AI-generated images included Getty watermarks, and that it was guilty of “passing off”.

In a sign of the complexity of AI copyright cases, it essentially argued that Stability’s image-generation model, called Stable Diffusion, amounted to an infringing copy because its making would have constituted copyright infringement had it been carried out in the UK.The judge ruled: “An AI model such as Stable Diffusion which does not store or reproduce any copyright works (and has never done so) is not an ‘infringing copy’.

” She declined to rule on the passing off claim and ruled in favour of some of Getty’s claims about trademark infringement related to watermarks.In a statement, Getty Images said: “We remain deeply concerned that even well-resourced companies such as Getty Images face significant challenges in protecting their creative works given the lack of transparency requirements.

We invested millions of pounds to reach this point with only one provider that we need to continue to pursue in another venue.“We urge governments, including the UK, to establish stronger transparency rules, which are essential to prevent costly legal battles and to allow creators to protect their rights.

”Christian Dowell, the general counsel for Stability AI, said: “We are pleased with the court’s ruling on the remaining claims in this case. Getty’s decision to voluntarily dismiss most of its copyright claims at the conclusion of trial testimony left only a subset of claims before the court, and this final ruling ultimately resolves the copyright concerns that were the core issue.

We are grateful for the time and effort the court has put forth to resolve the important questions in this case.”

Analysis

Conflict+
Related Info+
Core Event+
Background+
Impact+
Future+

Related Podcasts

AI公司在照片社版权索赔案中赢得高院裁决 | Goose Pod | Goose Pod