From AI-generated images to viral marketing slogans, originality has never felt more effortless – or been more risky. A recent High Court ruling involving Getty Images and artificial intelligence developer Stability AI has put copyright firmly in the spotlight, reminding businesses and creators alike that innovation has to operate within legal boundaries.
The Getty case is one of the UK’s first to grapple directly with AI and copyright. While Getty Images withdrew certain claims relating to the use of third-party material to train AI models, the court delivered a landmark judgment in rejecting the argument that AI models themselves amount to infringing copies.
However, the court did allow claims to proceed where AI outputs appeared to replicate or closely reference protected material, including instances where generated images appeared to contain altered versions of the watermark Getty applies to protect its public catalogue. In doing so, it provided useful guidance on what constitutes an “article” and an “infringing copy” for the purposes of secondary copyright infringement
“This judgment underscores an important legal truth: while technology is evolving quickly, copyright law is not being left behind,” said commercial litigation law expert Samuel Pedley of mfg Solicitors, Midlands-based solicitors. “It is a significant ruling, although some of the most important primary infringement questions were not tested, but may be clarified in future cases.”
And it is not only global tech companies facing scrutiny. Smaller businesses and individuals are increasingly finding themselves on the wrong side of intellectual property law.
Recent disputes highlight how easily creative inspiration can tip into infringement. In one high-profile example, award-winning cookbook author Yasmin Khan has faced a challenge over the use of the word Sabzi as the title of a vegetarian cookbook. The owner of a Cornish delicatessen business trading under the same name claims the book benefits from the goodwill of her established brand, while the publisher argues the term is generic, a Farsi word in regular usage, and predates the Cornish business.
Elsewhere, activewear brand Sweaty Betty has been accused of copying an established slogan used by another leggings brand, illustrating how short phrases and taglines can attract protection where they function as brand identifiers. Nixi Body has used the tagline “No leaks, no ifs. Just butts” for about four years but last year Sweaty Betty began using “No ifs. Just butt” when it launched a competing FemTech range, leading to complaints from Nixi.
And in a more eye-catching dispute, two companies offering semi-naked male servers for parties have clashed over the use of the phrase “butlers in the buff”. One business uses the wording as its trading name and claims it is distinctive to its services, while the rival argues it is purely descriptive.
Taken together, these cases show how copyright and trademark disputes can affect all sectors - from software developers and retailers to creatives and influencers - particularly where branding, imagery or content plays a central role in how a business markets itself.
“When you’re a small business with a limited marketing budget, slogans, names and catchphrases can be incredibly valuable,” said Mr Pedley. “Hard-won visibility through search terms and social media means branding often carries more weight than it did even a few years ago.”
The rise of AI tools adds another layer of complexity. Generative platforms can produce images, copy and concepts in seconds, but they do not guarantee originality in a legal sense. Outputs may draw heavily on existing styles, compositions or language, creating risks for users who assume ‘computer-generated’ means ‘safe to use’.
Added Mr Pedley: “This is where caution is essential. Drawing inspiration from trends is lawful but copying protected elements - even unintentionally - can lead to costly disputes. Courts focus on substance rather than intent, asking whether a work reproduces a substantial part of another or misleads consumers as to its origin.
“Many disputes are not about deliberate copying. They arise when people assume that small changes, common phrases or AI-generated content are automatically safe, when in fact copyright and trademark law often protect the overall look, feel or commercial impression.”
For businesses launching new products, campaigns or content, the message is consistent: check before you leap. That may mean searching trademark registers, reviewing licences or taking advice where ideas overlap with existing brands or creative works.
“As innovation accelerates and AI blurs the line between inspiration and imitation,” Mr Pedley added, “understanding where originality ends and infringement begins can prevent bright ideas from turning into expensive legal headaches.”
Getty-Images-v-Stability-AI judgement
How we can help
For more and how we can help you, contact Head of Litigation, Samuel Pedley by calling 01562 820181 or by emailing samuel.pedley@mfgsolicitors.com
*This is not legal advice; it is intended to provide information of general interest about current legal issues.