Copyright

Subscribe to Copyright via RSS

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?

A UK court has ruled that Getty Image’s lawsuit against Stability AI for copyright infringement over generative AI technology can proceed. Stability had sought to have the case dismissed, alleging in part, that the AI models were trained in the US. However, the court relied on seemingly contradictory public statements by Stability’s CEO, including that Stability helped “fast track” UK residency applications of Russian and Ukrainian developers working on Stable Diffusion. This suggests that at least some development occurred in the UK. A similar case involving the parties is pending in the US. One significance of where the case is heard is that in the US, fair use can be a defense to copyright infringement. But not in the UK. This is just one example of where disparate country laws relating to AI may cause AI developers to forum shop to develop AI where the laws are most favorable. For example, Japan has announced that it will not enforce copyrights on data used in AI training. If such activity is found to be infringing in the UK, US or elsewhere, it is conceivable that some companies will move their AI training activities to Japan.Continue Reading Getty Image’s AI Model Training Lawsuit in UK Against Stability to Proceed 

In a decision issued[1] November 27, 2023, a Chinese court ruled that AI-generated content can enjoy protection under copyright law. The finding, the first of its kind in China, is in direct conflict with the human authorship requirement under U.S. copyright law and may have far-reaching implications.Continue Reading Computer Love: Beijing Court Finds AI-Generated Image is Copyrightable in Split with United States

The growth of artificial intelligence (“AI”) and generative AI is moving copyright law into unprecedented territory. While US copyright law continues to develop around AI, one boundary has been set: the bedrock requirement of copyright is human authorship. Given this, it is clear in the US, AI alone cannot be an author. This bedrock principle was reinforced in two recent copyright decisions. But unanswered questions abound. For example, how will the Copyright Office address collaborative or joint works between a human and AI? And will this bedrock principle be limited to generative AI, or may it lead to revisiting copyright protection for other technologies where creative decisions are left to machines?Continue Reading Generative AI and Copyright – Some Recent Denials and Unanswered Questions