Getty Images (US), Inc. & Ors v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 749 (16 June 2025)

Getty Images (US), Inc. & Ors v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 749 (16 June 2025)

The appeal was dismissed because, although the term 'pornography' is broad and could include CSAM, the parties understood at the case management conference that Getty needed to particularise the specific images relied upon. The subsequent amendment to the pleading limited the scope to the specific examples provided, which did not include CSAM. Therefore, the judge was correct that the pleaded case did not extend to CSAM.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 749
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Getty Images (US), Inc.; Claimant/appellant: Getty Images International U. C.; Claimant/appellant: Getty Images (UK) Limited; Claimant/appellant: Getty Images Devco UK Limited; Claimant/appellant: iStockphoto LP; Claimant/appellant: Thomas M. Barwick, Inc.; Defendant/respondent: Stability AI Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order Regarding Scope of Pleaded Case
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Infringement, Pleading Requirements, Artificial Intelligence, Copyright, Database Right, Passing Off
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Trade Mark Infringement Pleading Requirements Artificial Intelligence Copyright Database Right Passing Off

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Getty Images (US), Inc.

Claimant/appellant

Getty Images International U. C.

Claimant/appellant

Getty Images (UK) Limited

Claimant/appellant

Getty Images Devco UK Limited

Claimant/appellant

iStockphoto LP

Claimant/appellant

Thomas M. Barwick, Inc.

Claimant/appellant

Stability AI Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order Regarding Scope of Pleaded Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether allegations concerning child sexual abuse material (CSAM) were pleaded in the Particulars of Claim
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in interpreting the scope of the pleaded case
  3. 3 Whether the judge misapplied principles on pleading serious allegations

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because, although the term 'pornography' is broad and could include CSAM, the parties understood at the case management conference that Getty needed to particularise the specific images relied upon. The subsequent amendment to the pleading limited the scope to the specific examples provided, which did not include CSAM. Therefore, the judge was correct that the pleaded case did not extend to CSAM.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The allegations advanced at paragraphs 5, 266.3 and 266.4 of the Claimants' skeleton argument are not pleaded in paragraph 57.9 of the Re-Re-Re-Amended Particulars of Claim.
  • Accordingly, the allegations may not be deployed as part of the Claimants' case at trial.