The issue of copyright in the age of artificial intelligence is back in the headlines, following a lawsuit filed at the Tel Aviv Magistrate's Court by photographer Ben Michael Shir against the fashion house 'Comme il Faut'. The lawsuit, totaling 100,000 NIS, raises fundamental questions regarding the boundaries of using technological tools for marketing content. At the core of the claim is Shir's contention that the brand's campaign, titled 'Don't Say You Didn't Know', was based on his documentary works from the 'Pioneers' series.
According to the complaint, the company used substantial parts of his photographs, where figures originally documented in a specific context were manipulated via AI tools into scenes of fire, smoke, and riots. In one detailed example, it is alleged that a figure of a young man carrying a goat was integrated into a scene of violence, with the goat replaced by a fuel canister. The plaintiff emphasizes that this was done without his knowledge or compensation, harming the integrity of his work and his moral rights as an artist.
Shir’s representatives argue that AI tools cannot serve as a legal shield for copyright infringement, and that a social or political message does not grant a brand permission to use photographers' works as raw material for new digital products. The plaintiff's attorney, Ariel Dubinsky, clarified that the fact that the output is AI-generated does not erase the original creator's rights, emphasizing that innovation does not grant a license to use another's assets.
Beyond financial compensation, the plaintiff is seeking a permanent injunction to remove the images from the brand's official website and social media channels. He also petitions the court to order the preservation of technical evidence, including source files and the prompts fed into AI systems, in an attempt to trace the campaign's creation process. It should be noted that this is not the only lawsuit filed against the campaign; reports indicate another claim by the Settlement Division, which alleges that the unauthorized use of its name damaged its reputation.
This case highlights the need for businesses to ensure copyright compliance even when content is generated through advanced technologies, underscoring that the legal context of 'copying' remains relevant even in a reality where the final product is created by a machine. As of now, no responses have been received from the defendants.