GPT-4o about Alcon v. Musk/Tesla/WB case: Even if an AI tool was used to “generate” the image, the defendants’ intent, input, and use of the resulting image are actionable...

Asking ChatGPT-4o: Please read the tentative ruling in the Alcon Entertainment v. Tesla, Elon Musk, Warner Brothers case and tell me what it says. List all potential consequences for those using AI-produced images in similar circumstances.

ChatGPT-4o’s answer:
Judge George H. Wu’s tentative ruling in Alcon Entertainment v. Tesla, Elon Musk, and Warner Bros. Discovery allows major portions of Alcon’s copyright lawsuit to proceed—particularly regarding AI-generated imagery alleged to have infringed the iconic visual style and specific scenes from Blade Runner 2049.

📌 Key Findings from Judge Wu’s Tentative Ruling:

1. Direct Copyright Infringement (Claim 1):

   • Allowed to proceed against Elon Musk and Tesla.

   • Dismissed against Warner Bros. Discovery due to insufficient “volitional conduct” (i.e., no direct creative control over the infringing material)​.

2. Vicarious Infringement (Claim 2):

   • Likely dismissed without prejudice, due to insufficient allegation of financial benefit causation, under precedent like Erickson Productions, Inc. v. Kast​.

3. Contributory Infringement (Claim 3):

   • Likely allowed to proceed against all defendants, including Warner Bros. Discovery, based on allegations that Warner knowingly allowed or even encouraged use of the AI-generated image despite Alcon’s denial of permission​.

4. False Affiliation/Endorsement (Claim 4 under the Lanham Act):

   • Likely dismissed with prejudice, as Judge Wu found insufficient legal grounds to support claims of consumer confusion or false endorsement under trademark law​.

⚠️ Key Allegations About the AI Image:

• Musk and Tesla allegedly used an AI image generator to produce a visual highly similar to a key scene from Blade Runner 2049 after being denied a license by Alcon just hours before the event.

• The AI-generated slide showed a silhouetted man in a trench coat (evoking the character “K”) overlooking an orange-lit post-apocalyptic city (evocative of the film’s “Las Vegas Sequence”)​.

• Musk, in his presentation at the “We Robot” event, explicitly referenced Blade Runner, saying: “I love Blade Runner, but I don’t know if we want that future...” – reinforcing the association with the film​.

🚨 Implications for AI-Generated Imagery:

Judge Wu’s tentative ruling sets a potentially precedent-shifting foundation for copyright litigation involving AI-generated works. The court took seriously the idea that:

1. Use of AI does not immunize from copyright liability.

   • Even if an AI tool was used to “generate” the image, the defendants’ intent, input, and use of the resulting image are actionable if the result is "substantially similar" to a copyrighted work​.

2. “Literal copying” via prompts or use of protected images as source material for AI training/input can support infringement claims.

   • Allegations that Musk or others may have input stills or video from Blade Runner 2049 into an AI model were deemed plausible enough to survive dismissal​.

3. Attribution, transformation, or stylization does not automatically negate infringement.

   • A stylized derivative work, particularly if it closely mirrors protected elements (e.g., mood, setting, characters), can still violate copyright law​.

🧠 Broader Consequences for AI Users:

If upheld, this case could reshape how individuals and corporations use AI-generated images for commercial or promotional purposes:

✅ Permissible Use Guidelines:

• Use original content or content licensed with appropriate rights.

• Avoid prompts or generation goals that explicitly replicate known copyrighted works (e.g., “in the style of Blade Runner 2049”).

❌ Risky Behaviors:

• Using AI to recreate or evoke highly distinctive elements from existing copyrighted works without permission.

• Publicly associating such imagery with the original work (e.g., mentioning Blade Runner while displaying similar visuals).

• Assuming that AI-generated content is inherently “transformative” or “fair use.”