Recently, the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf made a notable ruling, stating that using artificial intelligence to convert others' copyrighted photos into comic-style works does not necessarily constitute copyright infringement. This decision provides new legal grounds for the AI creation field, especially regarding the complex relationship between creation and copyright protection.

Copyright

This case originated from a lawsuit by a photographer known for his underwater dog photos. He sued his former business partner, claiming that the latter input his copyrighted photos into an AI software and published the generated comic-style works on social media. After reviewing the case, the court dismissed the photographer's appeal, stating that the AI-generated works did not directly copy protected creative elements such as composition, perspective, and lighting of the original work. Additionally, the court pointed out that the subject of the photography itself is not protected by copyright law.

The judge cited relevant rulings from the European Court, emphasizing that when assessing infringement, it is not only about whether the overall work is similar, but also whether identifiable creative elements were used. Moreover, the court specifically noted that only if there are "identifiable creative decisions" by humans during the creation process can the AI-generated works be protected by copyright. Simply entering some common prompts or choosing to generate images cannot be considered true creation.

This ruling has sparked widespread discussion on the copyright protection of AI-generated works and also provided new insights into how AI can adapt to copyright laws in the future.