December 19, 2024

The AI Legal Battlefield: Analyzing the Wave of AI-Related Lawsuits in 2023-2024

by Alan Brooks

The artificial intelligence industry faces unprecedented legal challenges as creators, publishers, and individuals contest AI companies’ use of copyrighted materials and personal data. A comprehensive review of current litigation reveals complex legal theories and potentially industry-altering implications.

Copyright Takes Center Stage

Most lawsuits against AI companies focus on copyright infringement, with 30 copyright cases currently pending in U.S. courts. These cases represent a broad spectrum of creative industries and legal theories.

Text and Literary Works

Major publishers and authors are spearheading significant legal challenges:

The New York Times v. Microsoft/OpenAI

  • Alleges unauthorized copying of millions of articles
  • Claims both training data and output infringement
  • Challenges the fundamental training process of large language models
  • Seeks both injunctive relief and damages

Authors Guild v. OpenAI (Consolidated Action)

  • Features prominent authors, including George R.R. Martin and John Grisham
  • Focuses on both training data usage and derivative works
  • Claims ChatGPT can reproduce substantial portions of copyrighted works
  • Questions fair use doctrine in AI context

Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence

  • Centers on the use of legal database content
  • Raises questions about specialized professional content in AI training
  • Could impact AI development in professional services

Visual Arts

Artists are mounting significant challenges to AI image generators:

Getty Images v. Stability AI

  • Claims unauthorized use of millions of photographs
  • Includes both copyright and trademark claims
  • Challenges in the removal of copyright management information
  • Could set precedents for visual data training

Sarah Andersen v. Stability AI

  • Represents visual artists’ rights
  • Addresses both training and output concerns
  • Recently survived a motion to dismiss core copyright claims
  • Questions about AI art generators’ fundamental business model

Music and Audio

The music industry has launched aggressive legal action:

Universal Music Group v. Anthropic

  • Seeks $75 million in damages
  • Focuses on reproduction of song lyrics
  • Questions AI models’ retention of copyrighted material
  • Could impact AI’s ability to process musical content

Voice Actor Cases

  • Multiple lawsuits, including Vacker v. ElevenLabs
  • Address unique issues of voice rights and reproduction
  • Combine copyright and publicity rights claims
  • Could affect the development of AI voice technology

Emerging Legal Theories

The lawsuits employ sophisticated legal arguments that go beyond basic copyright infringement:

Direct Infringement Claims

Defendants are accused of copying works during the training process.

  • Training process copying
  • Model storage and retention
  • Output generation
  • Derivative works creation

Secondary Liability

  • Contributory infringement by technology providers
  • Vicarious liability for user-generated content
  • Platform responsibility for AI outputs
  • Corporate officer liability

Technical Legal Issues

  1. DMCA Violations
    • Removal of copyright management information
    • Circumvention of technical protection measures
    • Platform safe harbor applicability
  2. Right of Publicity
    • Voice reproduction rights
    • Personal likeness protection
    • Commercial exploitation claims
  3. Unfair Competition
    • Market displacement
    • Unauthorized commercial use
    • Competitive advantage through infringement

Privacy and Personal Rights

Privacy-focused lawsuits represent a parallel trend:

Class Actions

  • A.S. v. OpenAI/Microsoft
  • A.T. v. OpenAI LP
  • J.L. v. Alphabet Inc.

Key Privacy Issues

  • Personal data processing
  • Consent requirements
  • Data protection standards
  • Biometric information usage

Jurisdictional Analysis

Cases are strategically filed in key jurisdictions:

Northern District of California (16 lawsuits)

  • Tech industry home court
  • Established IP precedents
  • Experienced judiciary in technology cases
  • Proximity to defendant headquarters

Southern District of New York (10 lawsuits)

  • Publishing industry center
  • Copyright expertise
  • Major media presence
  • Established IP precedents

District of Delaware (3 lawsuits)

  • Corporate registration nexus
  • Business-focused judiciary
  • Complex litigation experience
  • Favorable procedural rules

Judicial Developments

Early rulings provide crucial insights:

Key Decisions

  • Judge Orrick’s dismissal of DMCA claims but preservation of copyright claims in Andersen
  • Judge Martinez-Olguin’s partial dismissal in OpenAI ChatGPT litigation
  • Judge Bibas’s analysis of fair use in Thomson Reuters case

Emerging Patterns

  • Courts generally allow copyright claims to proceed
  • Skepticism toward DMCA claims
  • Focus on fair use analysis
  • Recognition of novel legal issues

Industry Impact and Future Implications

These lawsuits could fundamentally reshape AI development:

Business Model Changes

  • Licensing requirements
  • Training data acquisition
  • Output restrictions
  • Pricing structures

Technical Adaptations

  • Training methodology changes
  • Data filtering systems
  • Output controls
  • Attribution mechanisms

Legal Compliance

  • Rights clearance processes
  • Data auditing requirements
  • User agreements
  • Privacy protection measures

Looking Ahead

The resolution of these cases will likely establish:

Legal Framework

  • Fair use boundaries in AI
  • Training data requirements
  • Output restrictions
  • Privacy standards

Industry Standards

  • Creator compensation models
  • Data usage agreements
  • Attribution systems
  • Compliance protocols

AI Industry at the Crossroads

The AI industry stands at a crucial crossroads, with these lawsuits potentially establishing the fundamental rules for artificial intelligence development and deployment for decades. The outcomes will likely require significant adaptations in how AI companies operate, train their models, and interact with content creators and users.

The resolution of these suits could determine whether AI companies must:

  • Obtain explicit permission for training data
  • Implement compensation systems for creators
  • Develop new technical approaches to AI training
  • Modify their business models to account for licensing costs

Note

This article is based on cases listed at https://chatgptiseatingtheworld.com/2024/08/27/master-list-of-lawsuits-v-ai-chatgpt-openai-microsoft-meta-midjourney-other-ai-cos/

 

Learn More

If you want to learn more about how ILS can help your firm with AI, please contact us at sales@ilsteam.com.

About ILS

ILS is the nation’s preeminent Plaintiff-only eDiscovery provider with expertise in leveraging AI for eDiscovery.

 We specialize in leveling the playing field for the Plaintiffs’ bar by providing high-quality discovery services to help clients win their cases. Our clients know they are sharing their vital case strategies with like-minded professionals committed and passionate about getting justice for Plaintiffs.

Over the past decade, we have worked on many of the country’s largest and most noteworthy litigations, including Takata Airbags, Roundup, Social Media Victims, 3M Combat Earplugs, JUUL Vaping, Actos/Bladder Cancer, VW Diesel Emissions, Alex Jones—Sandy Hook, Opioids, and Philips CPAP.

 ILS supports leading platforms, including Reveal, Everlaw, Merlin, Relativity, iConect, and Nebula.

 Learn more at www.ilsteam.com.