Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

AZJonnie

(4,228 posts)
1. This will be a interesting case. At heart, it's a pretty common "securities" argument, not a copyright one
Wed Jun 24, 2026, 05:39 AM
Wednesday

There's been 1000's of cases just like this one, ever since "stocks" were a thing. Company execs misled shareholders about some *thing*, and those lies cost the stockholders a bunch of money.

In the end I'd guess it'll hinge mostly on whether or not it can be proven that the managers knew, or should have know, they were misleading investors. Discovery (emails and such) could be a real thorn for these execs

In the end, who wins will probably come down to whether Adobe execs said or signed of on statements that were categorically and unambiguously claiming the company "are not infringing on copyrights while training its AI". If they really did that, the plaintiffs I'm guessing will win, esp. since that site is well-known for pirated materials.

However if what they actually did was "characterizing the strategy as a ‘generational opportunity’ to enhance productivity and creativity through responsible, ‘commercially safe’ models natively integrated into its software ecosystem,” it might be a tougher slog for plaintiffs. Because the key words here don't have hard definitions. They're weasel words and marketing-speak.

I don't know either way what the truth is (though I suspect the plaintiffs have 'em dead to rights), but that'll be the basic question.

Another interesting piece of this is that I would bet AI generally is playing havoc on Adobe's business model. "Why do I need Photoshop if I can just tell AI to conjure up the image I want" type of thing. So it may turn out legally difficult for shareholders to positively attribute the companies recent loss in value to their AI training scandal. That might not effect whether they win generally, but could have a large effect on how much they receive in recompense.

Another interesting twist would be if it turned out that the AI companies stole Adobe code to train their models to do what they do

I'll be watching with some interest, hope you'll keep us posted HPD, and keep their feet to the fire!

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Investors sue Adobe execs...»Reply #1