USA – NEW YORK Trends and Developments Contributed by: Nancy E Wolff, Scott J Sholder and Elizabeth Safran, Cowan DeBaets Abrahams & Sheppard LLP
crucial emerging licensing market for artists’ works, for which they may wish to ensure the implementa - tion of guardrails and licence terms, but it undercuts sources of additional revenue, which, for many crea - tors, can mean the difference between continuing to pursue their careers or being pushed out. Additionally, because AI models offer users the ability to generate realistic images from text prompts, this technology further risks disrupting and disincentivising human industry. AI models in other industries present analogous con - cerns. Text-to-text and text-to-audio models trained on textual and musical works require the same copi - ous amounts of content-as-data for training purposes, often scraped unauthorisedly, and ultimately poised to supplant markets for human authorship with the advent of AI-generated competing and/or infringing works. Accordingly, there is a push among many crea - tive industries for AI platforms to afford creators the right to consent to the use of their work for training purposes (ie, to “opt in” rather than “opt out”); to attri - bution where their work develops or contributes to the output of AI systems; to remuneration for the use of their work in training datasets and where AI-generated outputs create subsequent commercial value; and to guardrails against digital replication of ingested works. Creative industries have responded to many AI plat - forms’ disregard for such rights, where such platforms trained on millions of copyrighted works amassed online without authorisation, with a wave of litigation. Cases include class action lawsuits (and individual actions) brought by visual artists against generative AI platforms, as well as by print and music publishers and authors against large language model platforms, alleging infringement resulting from this unauthorised use of their original works, and which platforms often also permit end-users to create works in an identifi - able artist’s style, and sometimes regurgitate works wholesale. Examples include: • In re Open AI, Inc., Copyright Infringement Litiga- tion (Multidistrict Litigation No 3143 consolidating existing Northern District of California and South - ern District of New York cases, date ordered 3 April 2025);
• Dow Jones & Company, Inc v Perplexity AI, Inc (No 1:24-cv-07984) (S.D.N.Y. 21 October 2024); • Bartz v Anthropic (No 3:24-cv-05417) (N.D. Cal. 19 August 2024); • Concord Music Group, Inc v Anthropic PBC (No 4:24-cv-03811) (N.D. Cal. 26 June 2024); • Kadrey v Meta Platforms, Inc (No 3:23-cv-03417) (N.D. Cal. 7 July 2023); • Getty Images v Stability AI (No 1:23-cv-00235) (D. Del. 3 February 2023); • Anderson v Stability AI Ltd (No 3:23-cv-00201) (N.D. Cal. 13 January 2023); • Disney Enterprises, Inc, et al v Midjourney, Inc (2:25-cv-05275) (C.D. Cal. 11 June 2025); and • Disney v Minimax (2:25-cv-08768) (C.D. Cal. 16 September 2025). The latter two cases represent the first significant AI cases brought by major film studios. Although the many ongoing AI lawsuits are presently situated across different stages of litigation, recent summary judgment decisions and settlements have begun to shed light on prospective trajectories and trends. The parties to Bartz v Anthropic , for example, recently reached a USD1.5 billion class action settle - ment, following Anthropic’s facing potentially massive statutory damages for its downloading of millions of pirated copies of authors’ books. Other AI developers watching this case likely face renewed concerns over liability particularly considering that many of them may have drawn material from the same pirated datasets; this, in turn, may encourage settlement and licensing deals. Following Bartz , various other high-profile music cas - es have been resolved in settlements, such as UMG’s suit against music generation platform Udio (1:24-cv- 04777) (S.D.N.Y. 24 June 2024), whereby the parties ultimately agreed to collaborate, entering into licence agreements for UMG’s recorded music and publish - ing catalogues. The parties also announced they will launch a new subscription service in 2026 for genera - tive AI models trained exclusively on authorised and licensed music, with artists given the opportunity to opt-in. See Universal Music Group and Udio Announce Udio’s First Strategic Agreements for New Licensed AI Music Creation Platform , UMG Press Release (29
696 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook