Lawsuits Over AI Training on Copyrighted Content Are Escalating
Creative industries escalate lawsuits against AI firms for unauthorized use of copyrighted works.
Why it matters: These cases will define how copyright law applies to generative AI, affecting legal tech innovation, compliance, and enforcement frameworks.
- On Nov 3, 2026, creative professional groups backed The New York Times in a copyright suit against OpenAI and Microsoft.
- Disney and Universal sued Midjourney in June 2025 for unauthorized use of iconic characters in AI-generated art.
- EVOX Productions sued Midjourney in July 2026 alleging use of over 100,000 copyrighted automotive images without permission.
- Plaintiffs are seeking damages up to $150,000 per work, injunctions, and jury trials in these cases.
The legal landscape around generative AI and copyright is heating up as major lawsuits challenge the use of copyrighted material for training AI models. On November 3, 2026, organizations representing music, film, television, performing arts, and writing professionals filed amicus briefs supporting The New York Times in its copyright infringement lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft. They argue AI firms must license copyrighted works before using them to train large language models, a position that challenges AI companies' current practices.
Earlier, in June 2025, Disney and Universal initiated a lawsuit against the AI art company Midjourney. The studios allege that Midjourney trained its models using their copyrighted characters, including Homer Simpson and Darth Vader, without permission, generating similar images. The suit seeks monetary damages, a jury trial, and an injunction barring further infringement.
In another July 2026 lawsuit, EVOX Productions LLC charged Midjourney with unlawfully downloading and reproducing more than 100,000 copyright-registered automotive images to train its AI product. EVOX alleges that Midjourney removed copyright management information, including watermarks and credit lines, to avoid detection. EVOX is seeking injunctive relief and statutory damages up to $150,000 per work for willful infringement as detailed in court filings.
Commentators note these cases test the boundaries of copyright law in the AI age. Amicus briefs emphasize no blanket exemptions for AI companies regarding licensing copyrighted content. Legal experts highlight that while learning from copyrighted material may not itself constitute infringement, replicating protected elements without permission crosses a clear line. These precedents will guide how AI developers, legal advisors, and the creative economy navigate IP compliance in coming years.
By the numbers:
- $41 million lawsuit filed by Authentic Brands over 274 Elvis Presley songs.
- Up to $150,000 per work in statutory damages sought by EVOX Productions LLC.
- 100,000+ copyrighted images allegedly used without authorization in Midjourney training.
Yes, but: Outcomes remain uncertain, with some arguing that AI’s transformative use could qualify as fair use, complicating straightforward copyright infringement claims.
What's next: Legal decisions forthcoming in the New York Times vs. OpenAI & Microsoft case and EVOX vs. Midjourney will provide critical precedent. Meanwhile, legislation like the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act may influence future enforcement.