Freelance photographers have raised alarms over contracts and lawsuits that could expose their archives to AI training without adequate compensation or consent.
In 2026, the Wall Street Journal updated its standard agreement for photojournalists, prompting concerns that it could allow the paper’s owner, News Corp, to sublicense images for AI development following the company’s earlier multimillion-dollar deal with OpenAI.
Ongoing litigation, including the expanded Andersen v. Stability AI case, continues to test whether companies can train image generators on billions of copyrighted photographs scraped from the internet without permission.
Photographers argue this constitutes mass copyright infringement that threatens their livelihoods, while AI companies maintain that training on publicly available data falls under fair use.High-profile disputes, such as the Ansel Adams Trust’s condemnation of an unauthorized AI-colorized version of the iconic “Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico” displayed at a major art fair, underscore tensions over commercial exploitation of legacy work.
These battles are reshaping contracts, licensing norms, and the economic model of photography. Many creators now demand explicit opt-outs or revenue-sharing agreements for any AI use of their images.
As courts and regulators grapple with these issues through 2026 and beyond, the outcome will determine whether photographers retain meaningful control over their intellectual property in an AI-dominated visual landscape.
