Using tools like Stability AI's Stable Diffusion, Midjourney, or the DreamUp generator on DeviantArt, people can type phrases to create artwork similar to living artists.Despite the controversy over Stable Diffusion, the legality of how AI image generators work has not been tested in court, although the Joesph Saveri Law Firm is no stranger to legal action against generative AI.In another section that attempts to describe how latent diffusion image synthesis works, the plaintiffs incorrectly compare the trained AI model with "having a directory on your computer of billions of JPEG image files," claiming that "a trained diffusion model can produce a copy of any of its Training Images."Ultimately, if trained properly, latent diffusion models always generate novel imagery and do not create collages or duplicate existing work—a technical reality that potentially undermines the plaintiffs' argument of copyright infringement, though their arguments about "derivative works" being created by the AI image generators is an open question without a clear legal precedent to our knowledge.Some of the complaint's other points, such as unlawful competition (by duplicating an artist's style and using a machine to replicate it) and infringement on the right of publicity (by allowing people to request artwork "in the style" of existing artists without permission), are less technical and might have legs in court."