Getty Images (US), Inc & Ors v Stability AI Ltd

Getty Images (US), Inc & Ors v Stability AI Ltd

Permission to rely on the SOCDT is refused for sections B, E, and F due to lateness, lack of proper particularisation, absence of good reason for delay, and significant prejudice to the defendant. Permission is granted only for section A (definitions) and sections C and D (datasets), subject to excision of references to new datasets and unparticularised inferences.

Parties
Claimant: Getty Images (US), Inc.; Claimant: Getty Images International UC; Claimant: Getty Images (UK) Limited; Claimant: Getty Images Devco UK Limited; Claimant: iStockphoto LP; Claimant: Thomas M. Barwick, Inc.; Defendant: Stability AI Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property / Interlocutory Application for Permission to Rely on a Statement of Case (socdt)
Outcome
Application partly allowed, partly refused.
Legal Topics
Pleadings, Late Amendments, Copyright Infringement, Database Rights, Case Management
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Pleadings Late Amendments Copyright Infringement Database Rights Case Management

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Getty Images (US), Inc.

Claimant

Getty Images International UC

Claimant

Getty Images (UK) Limited

Claimant

Getty Images Devco UK Limited

Claimant

iStockphoto LP

Claimant

Thomas M. Barwick, Inc.

Claimant

Stability AI Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property / Interlocutory Application for Permission to Rely on a Statement of Case (socdt)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants should be permitted to rely on the SOCDT as a new pleading at a late stage before trial
  2. 2 Whether the SOCDT constitutes a late or very late amendment requiring court permission
  3. 3 Whether the SOCDT contains material facts that must be pleaded

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to rely on the SOCDT is refused for sections B, E, and F due to lateness, lack of proper particularisation, absence of good reason for delay, and significant prejudice to the defendant. Permission is granted only for section A (definitions) and sections C and D (datasets), subject to excision of references to new datasets and unparticularised inferences.

Court Disposition

Application partly allowed, partly refused.

Orders

  • Permission granted to rely on section A of SOCDT (definitions) and sections C and D (datasets), subject to excisions.
  • Permission refused for sections B, E, and F of SOCDT.