Man who used generative AI to create image accused of copyright infringement, in potential landmark case

Courtrooms around the world have debated the legality of AI-generated works. So far, copyright infringement claims have fixated on the owners of generative AI tools. However, in Japan, a citizen risks “severe punishment” after directing Stable Diffusion to reproduce a familiar image.

Based on a Japanese article, Automaton discussed the difficulties confronting the 27-year-old man. Police in the Chiba Prefecture have recommended that the individual be prosecuted for copyright violations. According to the Yomiuri Shimbun media outlet, it’s the first time a member of the public has faced charges for using an AI-produced image.

Even if a legal case proceeds, it may be difficult for prosecutors to score a victory. Plaintiffs typically pursue the makers of these apps, who have the resources to pay out large judgments. Opinions surrounding the fair use of images created by generative AI systems have varied by country. Regardless, other claims against Stable Diffusion have failed to achieve the desired result.

Getty Images in the U.K. came up short in its copyright infringement accusations against the open-source solution. In the U.S., judges have consistently ruled that machine-generated artwork doesn’t qualify for copyright protection. Nevertheless, one legal expert believes that the circumstances surrounding the potential indictment in Japan differ.

How a Japanese court could justify an indictment

Kensaku Fukui notes that the man made 20,000 requests to the Stable Diffusion AI model. The individual then allegedly used one result as a book cover, before selling it at a retail. Fukui argues that he issued detailed instructions in order to reproduce a copyrighted image. If a trial unfolds, attorneys will wrangle with whether intent should be a factor in any findings of criminal wrongdoing.

It’s unclear if a copyright holder contacted the police or what AI artwork the unidentified man supposedly copied. Regardless, any ruling against him would set a historic legal precedent.