Indirect Infringement Example in AI: Why Companies Get Sued Even If Users Generate the Content

In many AI copyright lawsuits filed in 2025, the main issue wasn’t whether companies copied protected works themselves. It was whether they could still be held liable for providing AI systems that allow users to generate copyrighted material. This is a common indirect infringement example now emerging in generative AI disputes.

Here are real situations raised in recent cases.

AI That Can Generate Protected Characters

In one lawsuit against an AI image generator, film studios argued that:

• users were able to generate recognizable copyrighted characters,

• the developer knew this was possible, and

• no effective safeguards were put in place to prevent it.

The user creates the output.
But the platform makes it possible.

If a company knowingly provides a system that enables reproduction of protected works without preventive controls, it may be seen as materially contributing to infringement.

Models Trained Using Unauthorized Content

Other lawsuits focus on how AI models were trained.

Plaintiffs accuse some developers of using pirated books or scraped news articles to train their AI models

Even though users later generate outputs on their own, liability may still arise if the system produces responses that closely reflect those training materials — especially if those outputs could replace the original work in the market.

Infringement Through System Design

In another ongoing case, plaintiffs accused developers not only of downloading copyrighted works during training but also of distributing them automatically through peer-to-peer processes.

Even if this happens in the background, system architecture that contributes to unauthorized distribution may create legal exposure.

Retrieval-Based AI Responses

Publishers have also challenged AI platforms that rely on retrieval-based systems.

They allege that:

• AI platforms scraped and stored copyrighted articles before generating responses to user prompts

Although the user asks the question, the platform may already have copied the material internally — which could qualify as an indirect infringement example if it facilitates reproduction of protected content.

As AI-related copyright disputes continue into 2026, courts and regulators now evaluate companies not just for what they copy directly, but for what their systems allow others to do. In practice, providing the tool may be enough to create an indirect infringement example.