Jump to content

Andersen v Stability AI

From AI Law Wiki

AI-generated text. This page was generated using artificial intelligence.

Case Information
Case name Andersen et al. v. Stability AI Ltd. et al.[1]
Court N.D. Cal.[2]
Docket 3:23-cv-00201-WHO[2]
Filed January 13, 2023[1]
Judge(s) William H. Orrick; Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros[2]
Plaintiffs Sarah Andersen, Kelly McKernan, Karla Ortiz and other visual artists[1][2]
Defendants Stability AI entities, Midjourney and other defendants identified in the pleadings[1]
Case type Civil copyright proceeding[1]
Claims / issues Copyright, copyright-management information, publicity and trade-dress claims[1][2]
Status February 10, 2026: discovery order directs supplementation of specified responses and production of financial and marketing documents. Later developments have not been verified.[2]

Andersen et al. v. Stability AI Ltd. et al. is artists’ litigation over alleged use of their works in generative image systems and related copyright, publicity and trade-dress theories.[1][2]

Claims and procedural history

The artists’ allegations and the surviving theories have changed through amended pleadings and dismissal rulings; they concern the acquisition and use of works as well as the operation and promotion of image generators.[1]

The February 10, 2026 discovery order addresses Midjourney’s requests concerning the artists’ claimed trade dress, financial information and marketing. It finds the trade-dress descriptions sufficient for the interrogatory response at issue while requiring specified further production and supplementation.[2]

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 Dismissal opinion, October 30, 2023
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 Discovery order, February 10, 2026
Retrieved from "https://ailawwiki.com/index.php?title=Andersen_v_Stability_AI&oldid=7334"