Copyright

Subscribe to Copyright via RSS

On June 4, 2025, Reddit, Inc. (“Reddit”) filed suit against Anthropic, PBC (“Anthropic”) in the Superior Court of California, alleging that Anthropic scraped and commercially exploited Reddit user data—including deleted posts—without consent or compensation.[1] Unlike recent enforcement efforts that have centered on establishing copyright infringement liability, Reddit’s complaint brings five causes of action—breach of contract, unjust enrichment, trespass to chattels, tortious interference, and unfair competition—reflecting a strategic choice to deploy contractual and privacy-based claims to address Anthropic’s allegedly unauthorized scraping of Reddit data.[2]Continue Reading Beyond Copyright: Reddit’s Lawsuit Against Anthropic

The Copyright Office released a “Pre-publication” version of Part 3 of its Report on Copyright and AI. Coincidentally (?) Shira Perlmuter, the Register of Copyrights, was fired amid a shakeup at the Copyright Office. The Report was also supposed to address infringement issues, but did not. Those issued will now be addressed in a Part 4 of the Report. Continue Reading Copyright Office Report on Training AI and Fair Use

In a significant move to address the tension between copyright and generative artificial intelligence (AI), the UK’s Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA), Authors’ Licensing and Collecting Society (ALCS), and Publishers’ Licensing Services (PLS) have announced plans to launch a collective licensing framework for AI training. The opt-in license would allow AI developers to use text-based published works—such as books, journals, and magazines—for training, fine-tuning, and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) while ensuring that creators are compensated. The license is expected to roll out in Q3 2025, following further consultation with publishers.Continue Reading UK’s Collective Licensing Initiative Aims to Harmonize AI and Copyright Law

The legal battles surrounding generative AI and copyright continue to escalate with prominent players in the Indian music industry now seeking to join an existing lawsuit against OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT. On February 13, 2025, industry giants such as Saregama, T-Series, and the Indian Music Industry (IMI) presented their concerns in a New Delhi court, arguing that OpenAI’s methods for training its AI models involve extracting protected song lyrics, music compositions, and recordings without proper licensing or compensation. This development follows a broader trend of copyright holders challenging generative AI companies, as evidenced by similar claims in the U.S. and Europe.Continue Reading Indian Music Industry Enters the Global Copyright Debate Over AI

The U.S. Copyright Office’s January 2025 report on AI and copyrightability reaffirms the longstanding principle that copyright protection is reserved for works of human authorship. Outputs created entirely by generative artificial intelligence (AI), with no human creative input, are not eligible for copyright protection. The Office offers a framework for assessing human authorship for works involving AI, outlining three scenarios: (1) using AI as an assistive tool rather than a replacement for human creativity, (2) incorporating human-created elements into AI-generated output, and (3) creatively arranging or modifying AI-generated elements.Continue Reading The Copyright Office’s Latest Guidance on AI and Copyrightability

In a strategic move to preserve their right to seek reconsideration of previously dismissed DMCA § 1202(b) claims, the plaintiffs in Andersen v. Stability AI have voluntarily dismissed with prejudice all DMCA claims. The opportunity to seek reconsideration of the dismissed claims will come if a reversal occurs in the Doe 1 v. Github interlocutory appeal. We covered more of the decisions in the Github case in this prior post.Continue Reading Andersen Plaintiffs Strategically Dismiss § 1202(b) Claims Pending Interlocutory Appeal in Github Case

We have previously reported on the Jobiak case which raises the interesting issue of whether an AI-scraped job database is subject to copyright protection and is infringed. We were hoping that the court would make substantive rulings on some of the AI issues. Instead, the court has granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, but granted Plaintiff leave to amend. So perhaps we will get some substantive rulings after an amended complaint is filed.Continue Reading Court Dismisses AI Scraping Claim, But Grants Leave to Amend

Given the introduction of the ‘NO FAKES’ Act by a bi-partisan group of senators within days of U.S. Copyright Office’s release of its digital replicas report asserting an “urgent need” for more cohesive protections at the federal level, it’s clear that momentum is building for federal oversight in the realm of deepfake and digital replication technology. This legislative effort is intertwined with broader national and global discussions about AI’s impact on privacy, intellectual property, and personal identity, alongside existing gaps in enforceable protections.Continue Reading Closer to a Federal Right of Publicity – Senate Introduces NO FAKES Act

The battle between open source software developers and the leading AI code generators will rage on. Despite the Court dismissing Plaintiffs’ Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) Section 1202(b) claims with prejudice, it declined to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims for breach of contract of open source license violations by Defendants. However, the Court also dismissed Plaintiffs’ request for of unjust enrichment and punitive damages.Continue Reading Court Rules in Landmark AI Code Generator Case – DMCA Claims Dismissed but Breach of Contract Claims Remain

We recently posted about the Jobiak case which raises the interesting question of whether scraping an AI-generated database of job listings constitutes copyright infringement (among other claims). Plaintiff has submitted its opposition, in which it raises the substantive arguments to the copyright claim set forth below.Continue Reading Jobiak’s Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Copyright Infringement Claims on AI-Created Database

A pending lawsuit raises an interesting copyright infringement question – does scraping an AI-generated database of job listings constitute copyright infringement?

In Jobiak v. Botmakers, Jobiak is an AI-based recruitment platform that offers a service for quickly and directly publishing job postings online and leverages machine learning technology to optimize third party job descriptions in real-time and generate an automated database for its job postings. Jobiak alleges copyright infringement (among other claims) because Botmakers scraped Jobiak’s proprietary database and subsequently incorporated its contents directly into its own job listings.Continue Reading Court to Decide Whether AI-scraped Job Database Is Subject to Copyright Protection and Is Infringed?