A federal judge has narrowed the scope of a lawsuit from a production company for Blade Runner 2049 accusing Tesla of feeding images from the movie into an artificial intelligence image generator to create unlicensed promotional materials and Warner Bros. Discovery of facilitating the partnership.

U.S. District Judge George Wu on Monday dismissed allegations that Alcon Entertainments trademarks were violated while allowing some copyright claims to proceed.

Teslas partnership with WBD to promote its robotaxi at a glitzy unveiling, which was done from a studio lot, last year sparked the lawsuit.At the presentation, Elon Musk reached the stage in what he called a cybercab before showing an image of a male figure wearing a trench coat whos surveying the abandoned ruins of a city bathed in a misty, orange light. Alcon alleged that the image was intended to be understood as an actual still from Blade Runner 2049s sequence of Ryan Goslings character exploring a ruined Las Vegas. Among the novel questions the case asks is whether the creation of a visual by an AI image generator by copying a portion of a copyrighted work without a license constitutes copyright infringement. Tesla argued that the claim shouldnt be advanced because Alcons allegations are only based on information and belief.

In Mondays order, the court said that itd be premature to dismiss the claim. It pointed to Teslas attempt to get permission to use Blade Runner 2049 for its event, which was denied just hours before the presentation was set to begin, as well as several similarities between the promotional materials that Tesla used and stills from the movie that were allegedly infringed upon.

Given the tight timeframe Musk and Tesla were working with in light of their last-minute request and the resulting last-minute denial to make use of BR2049, it is not at all implausible for Plaintiff to allege on information-and-belief that they made use of an AI image-generator to come up with the finished product, Wu wrote.

While most copyright claims against Tesla were allowed to proceed, those against WBD were dismissed except one for contributory infringement, which accuses the studio of inducing the alleged misconduct. The court agreed with the company that wasnt responsible for overseeing Teslas work in relation to the presentation. There is nothing indicating that Warner had such a supervisory/controlling position or role vis a vis Tesla and Musk, stated the order.

And in a win for Tesla and WBD, the court dismissed a claim for an alleged violation of the Lanham Act, a federal trademark law that bars false association. Although Musk said Blade Runner during his presentation, he didnt mislead viewers as to the source of the movie, according to the ruling. Wu also stressed that Tesla and Alcon arent competitors.

Tesla and Musk are looking to sell cars, the judge wrote. Plaintiff is plainly not in that line of business.

The court said itd likely allow Alcon to fix its copyright claims but not those alleging violations of the Lanham Act, finding that such amendments would be futile.