According to the lawsuit, Memes Apps offers subscription tiers priced at $40 and $199 per month for AI-powered advertising tools. Saflor said he did not contact the company before filing suit and has not personally identified advertisements generated from his comic. Instead, he filed the case to obtain discovery that could reveal how frequently the image was used and whether the company profited from those uses.
Saflor is asking the court to stop Memes Apps from using the comic as a template and to require a full accounting of advertisements generated from his work so he can pursue any profits tied to its alleged unauthorized use.
The case could test how existing copyright law applies when AI products package internet-famous images into commercial services. Internet law expert Eric Goldman told Ars Technica that Saflor's complaint builds on a 2024 ruling involving the "SuccessKid" meme, in which a court found that using the meme in a campaign advertisement required permission from its creator.
Goldman said the lawsuit begins "on the right foot," noting that it focuses on commercial advertising rather than non-commercial meme sharing. He previously wrote that the SuccessKid decision suggested "meme usage for noncommercial purposes is likely fair use, while meme usage in ads isn't."
At the same time, Goldman said Saflor's legal strategy presents challenges. By suing the AI meme generator instead of advertisers that may have used its outputs, the case raises broader questions about how courts should treat platforms built around reusable meme templates. He also noted that proving financial harm could become difficult if no advertisements using the comic are ultimately identified, and calculating damages from subscription revenue may be complex.
Saflor argues that widespread internet popularity should not erase an artist's legal rights. "There's a big difference between Internet users making memes for fun and a company monetizing my copyrighted work as part of a commercial product," he said.
He also rejected the idea that becoming a meme places creative works outside copyright protection. "Many of the Internet's most recognizable memes began as someone's original artwork, photograph, or creative expression," Saflor said. He argued that allowing companies to "commercially exploit those works without permission simply because they've become popular online" creates a "dangerous precedent," particularly as AI-powered products increasingly rely on existing creative works.
Goldman said one aspect of the lawsuit could distinguish it from broader AI copyright disputes. He noted that the alleged outputs appear to reproduce Saflor's original artwork rather than simply imitate its style, an issue that has become a central point of debate in larger cases involving generative AI systems.
Saflor emphasized that he is not opposed to AI technology itself and uses AI tools in his own work. His concern, he said, is with AI products that commercialize creators' work without authorization.
"My goal is simply to protect creators when their work is allegedly commercialized without permission," Saflor said. "I hope this case helps start a broader conversation about respecting artists' rights as AI-powered platforms become a bigger part of Internet culture."
This analysis is based on reporting from arstechnica.
Image courtesy of Saflor / Superelmer.
This article was generated with AI assistance and reviewed for accuracy and quality.
