Case updates
For more details and documents, see the public case dockets:
Andersen v. Stability: the Court issued its ruling on defendants’ motions to dismiss, allowing all of Plaintiffs’ theories of copyright infringement to proceed, as well as Plaintiffs’ claims of false endorsement and trade-dress infringement under the Lanham Act.
Zhang v. Google: Plaintiffs filed oppositions to Google’s motion to dismiss and accompanying request for judicial notice.
Andersen v. Stability: tentative rulings issued for May 8 hearing on defendants’ pending motions to dismiss. The hearing will take place May 8 at 2pm PDT and will be broadcast to the public via Zoom.
Initial complaint against Google filed on behalf of plaintiffs Jingna Zhang, Sarah Andersen, Hope Larson, and Jess Fink.
Plaintiffs filed oppositions to defendants’ motions to dismiss, and responses to Midjourney’s and Runway’s requests for judicial notice.
Plaintiffs’ opposition to Stability’s motion to dismiss
Plaintiffs’ response to Runway’s request for judicial notice
Plaintiffs’ opposition to Midjourney’s motion to dismiss
Plaintiffs’ opposition to Midjourney’s request for judicial notice
Plaintiffs’ opposition to DeviantArt’s motion to dismiss
Consistent with the Court’s order of October 31, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint.
Plaintiffs’ first amended complaint (with exhibits A–N included)
Plaintiffs’ first amended complaint
Exhibit A - Plaintiff Images in LAION-5B
Exhibit B - Plaintiff Images in LAION-400M
Exhibit C - Plaintiff Copyright Registrations
Exhibit D - Stability Text Prompts
Exhibit E - Runway Text Prompts
Exhibit F - Midjourney Text Prompts
Exhibit G - Stability Image Prompts
Exhibit H - Runway Image Prompts
Exhibit I - Midjourney Image Prompts
Exhibit J - Midjourney Name List
Exhibit K - Midjourney Showcase
Exhibit L - DeviantArt Terms of Service (Nov. 11, 2022)
Exhibit M - DeviantArt Terms of Service (Jan. 11, 2023)
Exhibit N - DeviantArt Privacy Policy (Jan. 11, 2023)
On July 19, the Court held a hearing on the motions to dismiss filed by Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt, as well as an anti-SLAPP motion filed by DeviantArt and joined by the other defendants.
In its order following the hearing, the Court denied Stability AI’s attempt to dismiss plaintiffs’ most significant claim, namely the direct copyright-infringement claim for misappropriation of billions of images for AI training. The Court also denied Midjourney’s attempt to dismiss the class allegations.
Beyond that, as is common in cases like this, the Court gave the plaintiffs permission to address remaining pleading issues by filing an amended complaint (by November 29). The Court also deferred ruling on defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion.
Overall we consider this a positive ruling for the plaintiffs, as the most significant claim in the complaint is now on a path to trial. The Court has set a case-management conference for November 7, 2023. Discovery in the case has been proceeding.
Plaintiff Karla Ortiz testified at a hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, on the subject of AI and copyright.
Plaintiffs filed oppositions to defendants’ motions to dismiss, Midjourney’s request for judicial notice, and DeviantArt’s anti-SLAPP motion.
Plaintiffs’ opposition to DeviantArt’s motion to dismiss
Plaintiffs’ opposition to Stability’s motion to dismiss
Plaintiffs’ opposition to Midjourney’s motion to dismiss
Plaintiffs’ opposition to Midjourney’s request for judicial notice
Defendants filed motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint. Defendant Midjourney also filed a request for judicial notice. Defendant DeviantArt also filed an anti-SLAPP motion. Details.
Initial complaint filed on behalf of plaintiffs Sarah Andersen, Kelly McKernan, and Karla Ortiz.