AI-Generated Images and Copyright: What You Need to Know Now

Published 18 December 2025

The explosion of AI image generators has created both new creative opportunities and legal uncertainties (not to mention risks of expensive fines and lawsuits) for users. Unless you thrive on landing yourself in legal hot water, understanding the copyright implications of AI-generated images is a good idea.

The true danger to businesses everywhere is the legal threat currently aimed directly at the very foundation of the AI models themselves, which could put you, the inadvertent AI user, at risk.

In the US, a growing number of lawsuits, led by some prominent artists, stock image libraries and media companies, are arguing that the core AI models were trained using large volumes of copyrighted material without authorization, an issue that remains the subject of active legal debate.

The central question before the courts is simple, yet civilization-defining: Is the act of training an AI on billions of scraped images simply a transformative “fair use” case? Or is it a systematic, billion-dollar infringement that will crush human creativity under the weight of automation? The answer will redefine the status of all AI art — and determine your safety in using it.

If you plan on generating AI images for your website, you should be aware of these cases so that you know what to look out for in the images AI generates for you.

Some of these lawsuits are scheduled for the end of 2026, so we currently don’t have a definitive, watertight ruling on US AI and copyright law. This article addresses what is known so far and offers tips to help keep you out of the above-mentioned hot water.

The Copyright Status of AI-Generated Images

As of 2025, the legal landscape for AI-generated images is ongoing and varies by jurisdiction. Here’s what is currently reported to be confirmed by the US Copyright Office (USCO):

No Copyright Protection for Purely AI Works. It seems that US courts have consistently ruled that works created entirely by AI or created using AI with only relatively minor modifications by a human cannot be copyrighted. “Substantial” human authorship is a fundamental requirement — and prompting AI doesn’t count (more on this below). Since AI is a machine that performs the actual image generation (creation) — not a human — the current consensus seems to be that such output cannot be copyrighted.

This would mean that anyone could legally use the same or similar AI-generated images as any you create, regardless of your genius-level prompting.

The Thaler Decision is a well-known example that illustrates the above point. In the case of Thaler v. Perlmutter, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the USCO’s denial of copyright registration for an artwork titled A Recent Entrance to Paradise, which was created solely by an AI system called the “Creativity Machine,” with input from Dr. Stephen Thaler. The court definitively ruled that the Copyright Act requires a human author.

Prompting is Insufficient: Merely providing a text prompt to a generative AI model seems to be generally not enough to establish human authorship over the resulting image. The USCO considers this to be similar to providing an idea or a general direction, with the AI performing the actual creative execution.

AI models trained on copyrighted works may generate outputs that closely resemble original works, creating a potentially expensive infringement risk for your website.

In short, some people are interpreting all this as no human = no copyright. But when was the law ever simple?

The situation changes when there’s a significant human creative contribution to the final work, even if AI was used to generate the initial image. Copyright may be claimed over the human-authored aspects of a work that incorporates AI-generated material — providing that the human-authored contribution is substantial.

Human Input. If there is substantial editing or modification of an AI-generated image by a human artist (such as adding original textures, painting over or making other significant creative alterations), the human-authored aspects of the image may qualify for copyright protection. As of now, the underlying AI-generated image, however, remains uncopyrightable.

So, what is meant by “substantial”? Well, as of the date of this article, the US courts and the Copyright Office haven’t offered a precise, quantitative definition thus far. Instead, they rely on the same fundamental test applied to all works: The contribution must meet the threshold of originality.

Currently (but subject to change, like almost everything on this topic), to be deemed “substantial” and eligible for copyright, the human modifications must display:

Independent creation. The creative effort must have originated with the human author.
At least a modicum of creativity. The contribution must involve a distinguishable level of creative choice and expression.

Selection and Arrangement. A human’s creative selection, coordination and arrangement of multiple, unprotectable AI-generated images or text into a final, coherent work (like a graphic novel with human text and arranged AI images) may qualify for copyright, while the accompanying AI-generated images do not.

Key Takeaway: In the United States, copyright guidance has emphasized the importance of human authorship, and images generated using AI may or may not qualify for copyright protection based on how they are created and used. If the image has been marginally altered, it is unlikely to qualify for copyright protection. If the AI-generated image has been substantially modified, the modifications themselves may qualify for copyright protection — as determined by the USCO — while the underlying AI-generated image will not.

Risks of Using AI-Generated Images

With copyright law relating to AI images still evolving, major lawsuits are challenging whether AI companies can legally use copyrighted images or other works to train their models without permission. If you plan on generating AI images for your website, you should be aware of these cases so that you know what to look out for in the images AI generates for you.

Yes, AI can generate some pretty fun images, but…

Lack of Copyright Protection: Since purely AI-generated images are not copyrightable (as of the date of this article), competitors could legally copy your AI visuals. To avoid this, the image would have to be sufficiently substantially altered to potentially qualify for copyright protection.

As discussed above, the underlying AI-generated image remains uncopyrightable, so a competitor could legally use the same or a similar image, leaving you without legal recourse.

Some AI image generators have accidentally produced outputs containing recognizable faces, characters or other recognizable artwork, watermarks or visual signatures from original copyrighted images in their training data — leading to potential legal trouble for users who publish those images.

If you want wholly unique images that a competitor cannot copy (and you don’t want to invest time in substantial changes that meet copyright protection criteria), AI-generated images may not be the best solution for you.

If you’ve used Stability AI’s Stable Diffusion to generate images for your site, you may want to verify that those images are safe to use. See below.

Getty Images vs. Stability AI. Getty alleges Stability AI used 12 million copyrighted photos to train Stable Diffusion without authorization. Some AI outputs even included visible Getty watermarks. While there are, clearly, risks relating to AI images, there is a tool that can check whether your AI images resemble copyrighted works. More on this below.

Potential Infringement in Outputs: AI models trained on copyrighted works may generate outputs that closely resemble original works, creating a potentially expensive infringement risk for your website. This is the exact scenario in the lawsuit mentioned below.

Disney and Universal vs. Midjourney: Two Hollywood studios, The Walt Disney Company and Universal City Studios Productions, sued Midjourney, an AI-powered image generator, in June 2025 for allegedly scraping copyrighted characters and enabling users to generate unauthorized images of Mickey Mouse, Darth Vader, Minions, Shrek, Bart Simpson and other protected intellectual property.

When generating AI images, be alert for anything that resembles well-known characters that are copyrighted.

Unclear Licensing Terms: Different AI platforms have different terms regarding commercial use, ownership and rights granted to users. This can create confusion and misunderstandings.
Evidence of Training Data: If an AI-generated image contains elements clearly derived from copyrighted works (like recognizable characters), you could face infringement claims. Remember the Disney/Universal lawsuit cited above?

The question of training data doesn’t apply only to images, but also applies to text.

In September 2025, Anthropic agreed to pay $1.5 billion to authors whose copyrighted books were used to train its AI. The matter has been widely discussed by industry observers and legal commentators in connection with ongoing discussions about creator compensation.

Examples of International Differences

While the above information pertains specifically to the current state of affairs in the United States, copyright law regarding AI-generated images varies internationally.

European Union

While the US requires strict human authorship, the European Union interprets this slightly differently, considering copyright possible only if the work is “the author’s own intellectual creation” and reflects the author’s personality by making free and creative choices. Inputting simple text prompts is unlikely to grant protection. The AI is generally seen as a tool and protection is possible only if the human user demonstrates sufficient creative control and input that reflects their originality. (Clear as mud?)

United Kingdom

In the UK, strict human authorship is not a requirement, but a human is necessary for ownership. UK law includes a unique provision for “computer-generated works” where there is no human author. In the case of computer-generated artistic works, the author is defined as “the person by whom the arrangements necessary for the creation of the work are undertaken.” The scope and definition of who that person is (user, developer) are still debated, but the law theoretically allows for the protection of purely machine-created art with a shorter copyright term of 50 years.

ImageVerifier is designed to assist you in identifying similarities between images and existing copyrighted works.

China

China tends to be more permissive, and courts have granted copyright protection to AI-generated images, focusing on the user’s “intellectual investment” and creative direction. Chinese courts have recognized copyright for users who actively designed elements, selected prompts and made iterative modifications, viewing the output as reflecting the user’s personalized expression. This is currently one of the most user-friendly approaches globally.

Since there are clearly different attitudes to the copyright of AI-generated images, we suggest researching the prevailing laws in your country so that you know exactly where you stand.

How ImageVerifier Addresses AI Image Risks

ImageVerifier is designed to assist in swiftly highlighting potential AI-related copyright issues by:

Scanning all images on your website, including AI-generated ones.
Cross-referencing against stock photo databases to detect whether AI outputs too closely resemble copyrighted images.
Providing risk assessment for each image based on the matches found.
Helping to identify which of your site images need replacement or license purchases.

While ImageVerifier can’t determine whether an image was AI-generated, it can alert you to potential matches with copyrighted works — a critical checklist item when using AI tools.

Tips for Creating AI-Generated Images

If you do decide to try your hand at generating AI images for your website, bear the following tips in mind:

Review platform terms carefully. Understand what rights you have to AI-generated images and whether commercial use is permitted.
Add human creativity. Make substantial creative modifications, edits or changes that increase your odds of obtaining copyright protection and strengthen your case against potential claims.
Avoid generating copyrighted characters. Don’t use AI to create images of trademarked characters, logos or recognizable copyrighted elements.

… there are legal risks you need to know.

Retain documentation. When creating and modifying an AI image, never fail to save your prompts, document your creative modifications and save your editing history to demonstrate human authorship. The US Copyright Office provides general, publicly available information about copyright registration in the United States.
Use ImageVerifier. Scan AI-generated images before publishing to check for potential matches with copyrighted works.
Consider traditional alternatives. For critical business assets, original photography or legitimately licensed stock images provide clearer legal protection.

The Last Word

As courts continue to rule on AI copyright cases, the legal framework will continually evolve. Caution, proactivity and ImageVerifier are practical tools for helping you reduce your risk of copyright infringement.

Disclaimer: The information on this website is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Nothing on this site creates an attorney–client relationship. Copyright laws vary by situation and country, and you should consult a licensed copyright attorney for advice regarding your specific circumstances.