The disqualification motion sits inside a larger case. Evox filed a copyright suit on July 2, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (No. 2:26-cv-07201) against Stability AI Inc., Stability AI Ltd., Stability AI US Services Corporation, Runway AI Inc., Hugging Face Inc., and DeviantArt Inc. The complaint alleges the defendants took more than 100,000 Evox photos into datasets used to train AI image generators without a license or payment. Crowell attorneys filed the complaint against Stability AI, Runway AI, and DeviantArt. On October 12, Stability AI and DeviantArt filed separate motions to dismiss, and Runway AI joined in challenging the claims. Evox has also sued Hugging Face, which did not answer the complaint after reportedly being served. A separate December 31 complaint targets university departments at Stanford, Michigan, Rice, and Baylor College of Medicine, alleging they used Evox's car photos to build separate programs. No ruling on the motions to dismiss or the disqualification request has been reported.
For attorneys, the immediate question is whether Evox keeps its lead counsel while the motions to dismiss are pending. A ruling on disqualification could reshape the case mid-briefing. The broader issue is conflicts: this dispute raises the question of how far a firm advising AI companies can go in representing rights holders against them. Watch for the court's ruling on the motion, whether Crowell's September letter is tested with declarations, and any ruling on the motions to dismiss, which would define the scope of the training-data claims.