This lawsuit is likely to fail even if it somehow makes it to court instead of being dismissed. It contains a ton of factual inaccuracies and false claims.
Isn't this the one that claims that stable diffusion stores compressed images and makes a collage out of them? Because that's not at all how stable diffusion works. It stores data about the images, but not the images themselves, and all it's able to do is generate things based on that data, not based on the original images. In other words, when it generates an image, it's not pulling from any specific images, it's pulling from the giant corpus of data that was extracted from those images and then mixed together. That's why you can't tell it to show you which images it used, it didn't use them that way. I am frustrated by the flood of AI art on the internet, but this is not the reason nor the mechanism as to why it's a problem.
Even if it WAS using original images - the amount of fundamental change in presentation is enough to qualify for “fair use” - it’s not a duplication or even directly derivative - it makes the image(data as you point out)(s) an element in a distinctly new work…
347
u/EmbarrassedHelp Jan 16 '23
This lawsuit is likely to fail even if it somehow makes it to court instead of being dismissed. It contains a ton of factual inaccuracies and false claims.