This is the Daily Tech News for Tuesday, November 4th, 2025. We tell you what you need to know.

Follow up on the context of those stories and help each other understand. Today, stable diffusion comes out ahead of Getty images in the UK, but does it set any precedent?

That's a good question, Tom.

I'm happy you asked.

I'm Jason Howell.

I'm Tom Merritt.

Let's start with what you need to know with the big story.

Yes, Getty Images has officially lost its UK lawsuit against stability AI, mostly, I'd say.

It's mostly dead.

It's mostly dead.

It's mostly a loss, is more what I mean.

The lawsuit centered on claims of primary copyright infringement, secondary copyright infringement, trademark infringement, lots of infringement going on around here.

Giddy dropped the main copyright argument during the trial.

Basically, it was unable to prove that stable diffusion was trained on Gettie images in the UK.

It also could not prove that stable diffusion was able to

reproduce exact images from its catalog. And Judge Joanna Smith found Getty's trademark infringed

on some AI outputs that included Getty's watermark. So the watermark could sometimes be

made to appear, but called the impact, quote, historic and extremely limited, which we can get into.

The judge basically dismissed secondary copyright claims, like I said, ruling that because Stable Diffusion's model doesn't actually store or reproduce full works from Getty Images catalog. It doesn't create

infringing copies. And this is something that we keep kind of hearing is, you know, is it actually

storing or creating a copy or is it, you know, influenced by this information to create something

else? And that's kind of what we're looking at here. Getty is also, by the way, pursuing legal action against stability AI in the U.S. This clearly has nothing to do with the A.I, with the U.S. case. But I don't know. What do you think, Tom? Does this signal any sort of anything for what we might expect here in the U.S. with the other case?

...