This article is general information only, not legal advice. For copyright questions specific to your business, consult a qualified legal adviser.
There is a gap in how many dealers think about copyright and car photos. The assumption is: I took the photo, or I made it with a tool, so it's mine. That assumption is wrong in several common situations, and it is getting dealers into trouble.
This article covers the specific copyright risks that arise when dealers use AI-generated vehicle images — particularly images generated to stand in for cars they have not photographed — and what the law actually says about ownership of AI output in the UK and the US.
How dealers end up with images they do not own
Research published by CBT News and Digital Dealer in early 2026, based on a survey of more than 500 US dealers commissioned by IMAGIN.studio, found that only one in ten dealers consistently list vehicles with relevant images from the start. Nearly half regularly use "image coming soon" placeholders — particularly among medium and high-volume dealer groups managing large inventories under stock turnover pressure.
That gap is where the problem begins. Dealers without photos of a specific vehicle have to fill the space somehow. Common approaches include:
- Using manufacturer press images or OEM stock photos sourced from the internet
- Taking images from another listing showing the same make and model
- Using a generic AI image generator to create a photo of the vehicle type
- Using stock photo libraries without checking the licence terms
Each of these approaches carries copyright risk that most dealers have not evaluated. The same survey found that around one in ten dealers are unsure whether the images they use are copyright-safe. That uncertainty is highest among small independent dealers and the largest dealer groups — the dealers with the least dedicated resource to check these things.
The copyright problem with each approach
Manufacturer press images and OEM stock photos
Car manufacturers own copyright in their press images. These images are generally licensed for editorial and journalistic use — reviews, news coverage, reference. They are not typically licensed for commercial use in a dealer's vehicle listing.
Using an OEM press image to represent a car you are selling is using copyrighted material for a commercial purpose without a licence. Franchise dealers may have specific arrangements with manufacturers that cover this. Independent dealers using manufacturer images sourced from the internet, or from a manufacturer's online press kit, typically do not.
The fact that the image is publicly accessible online does not create a licence to use it commercially. This is a common and expensive misunderstanding.
Images taken from other listings
A listing photo taken by another dealer, a previous owner, or an auction house is someone else's photograph. Photographs are protected by copyright from the moment they are taken. Taking an image from another listing and using it as your own is copyright infringement.
This happens more often than it should. A car reappears in the market from auction, a dealer finds photos from a previous listing and reposts them. The risk is real: franchise dealers' website vendors have faced copyright letters and financial demands for exactly this behaviour. As one industry commentary noted, when copyright issues arise from a vendor using unlicensed images on a dealer's site, the legal demand tends to land with the dealer, not the vendor.
Generic AI-generated vehicle images
This is where the copyright picture becomes more complicated, in a way that creates risk from both directions simultaneously.
If a dealer uses a generic AI image generator to produce a photo of a specific vehicle type, two problems can arise.
First, the generator may produce output that resembles or substantially reproduces existing copyrighted images from its training data — images it was trained on without those rights holders' consent. If the output is close enough to an existing copyrighted work, infringement liability could flow to the person who used and published the image commercially. This is an active area of litigation in the US, with multiple cases currently working through the courts.
Second — and in the opposite direction — an AI-generated image that was produced without meaningful human authorship may not attract copyright protection at all. This means that if someone else copies or misuses your AI-generated listing image, you may have no legal basis to object.
Stock photo libraries — not all licences cover commercial listing use
Many stock image libraries offer free tiers or inexpensive image access, but the licences attached to those images vary significantly. Images licensed for "non-commercial use" or "editorial use" are typically not licensed for use in commercial listings. An extended or commercial licence is required for use in advertising or product listings, and these are usually paid.
Dealers using stock images sourced from free tiers of image libraries may be operating outside the licence terms without realising it.
What UK law says about copyright in AI-generated images
Under UK law, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA) provides specific rules for computer-generated works.
Section 9(3) of the CDPA states that for a computer-generated work — defined as a work "generated by a computer in circumstances such that there is no human author" — copyright is owned by "the person by whom the arrangements necessary for the creation of the work are undertaken."
In practice, this creates significant ambiguity. The law does not clearly define whether "the person who made the arrangements" is the developer of the AI tool, the person who prompted it, or someone else entirely. Only a small number of UK court decisions have addressed this provision, and the question of how it applies to modern generative AI remains unsettled.
The UK government indicated in 2024 that it was reviewing whether Section 9(3) should be retained. The position under UK law for AI-generated output is currently uncertain — both in terms of whether the output is protected and in terms of who that protection belongs to.
What is clear: if an AI-generated image substantially reproduces an existing copyrighted work, infringement can still occur, and the human operator who publishes the image commercially would bear liability.
What US law says about copyright in AI-generated images
The US Copyright Office has addressed this directly. In a February 2023 decision — and confirmed in a Part 2 report published in early 2025 — the Office's position is that wholly AI-generated works are not protected by copyright. The requirement for human authorship is not satisfied by a person prompting an AI model. Content created without meaningful human creative input does not qualify for copyright registration or protection.
This was confirmed in Thaler v. Perlmutter, in which the District Court held that copyright requires human authorship. A DC Circuit appeals panel affirmed. The US Supreme Court declined to hear the case in March 2026.
The practical implication: an AI-generated listing image may not be protectable. If a competitor copies it, you may have no claim. The image provides no copyright asset.
This sits alongside the training data liability question: if the AI was trained on copyrighted images, the generated output may carry infringement risk for the person who uses it commercially.
Why using AI editing built on your own photos is different
The copyright trap described above applies specifically to AI-generated stand-in images — images that substitute for a car the dealer has not photographed.
Background replacement tools like Motuva work differently. The process takes a photo that the dealer took of their actual vehicle. The AI generates a new professional background around that car. The underlying photograph — of the dealer's actual car — was taken by the dealer. They own it. The output is derived from their photograph.
This is materially different from generating a vehicle image from scratch. There is no question about who photographed the car. There is no risk of reproducing someone else's image of a similar model. The provenance is clear.
The dealer's ownership of their own photograph of their own vehicle is not in question. One honest caveat: the AI-generated background layer in the output may itself sit in the same grey area this article describes — the clearly protectable asset is your underlying photograph, not necessarily the generated scene built around it.
A brief note on manufacturer trade marks in car photos
This article is focused on copyright in listing images. There is a separate and more nuanced topic around the use of manufacturer branding and trade marks in vehicle photography and marketing, including the question of using stock images of branded vehicles without a manufacturer licence. That topic now has its own dedicated article: can you use manufacturer stock photos in used listings?
The short version for now: if you are photographing cars you own or hold in stock, the trade mark question around what appears incidentally in a photo of the vehicle is generally different from actively reproducing a manufacturer's press imagery for commercial advertising.
For the broader picture
This article is part of a series on what AI car photo tools do, what's legally fine, and where the considerations sit. The hub article maps the full topic: AI car photos for dealers: what's allowed and what works.
For what AI editing actually changes in a vehicle photo: What AI Car Photo Editing Actually Changes (and What It Shouldn't).
For the direct question about misleading representation: Are AI-Edited Car Photos Misleading? The Honest Dealer's Answer.
The Motuva FAQ covers how the output process works and answers the questions dealers ask before starting.
This article is general information only, not legal advice. For UK copyright questions, refer to the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and seek advice from a qualified IP solicitor. For US copyright questions, refer to the US Copyright Office at copyright.gov. For advice specific to your business, consult your own legal advisers.
Related reading
A practical guide for UK dealers on what AI car photo tools do, what's legally and ethically fine, where the lines are, and how honest dealers use them.
An honest account of what AI car photo editing does: what the AI generates, what stays fixed, and where the risk under UK consumer law sits.
Dealers ask whether AI car photos cross a legal or ethical line. Here's an honest answer — what AI changes, what it doesn't, and where the line is.
Manufacturer photos in used car listings: what press-site licences actually permit, the copyright and consumer-law risks, and the better answer for dealers.