SCOTUS Tackles Illegal File Sharing, Internet Music Piracy, and Copyright Law; Reason, December 7, 2025

 DAMON ROOT, Reason; SCOTUS Tackles Illegal File Sharing, Internet Music Piracy, and Copyright Law

"A decision in Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment won't be coming our way until sometime next year, so until then, we'll just have to wait and see."

Court seems dubious of billion-dollar judgment for copyright infringement; SCOTUSblog, December 2, 2025

 Ronald Mann, SCOTUSblog; Court seems dubious of billion-dollar judgment for copyright infringement

 "My basic reaction to the argument is that the justices would be uncomfortable with accepting the broadest version of the arguments that Cox has presented to it (that the ISP is protected absent an affirmative act of malfeasance), but Sony’s position seems so unpalatable to them that a majority is most unlikely to coalesce around anything that is not a firm rejection of the lower court’s ruling against Cox. I wouldn’t expect that ruling to come soon, but I don’t think there is much doubt about what it will say."

Court to consider billion-dollar judgment for copyright infringement; SCOTUSblog, November 25, 2025

Ronald Mann , SCOTUSblog; Court to consider billion-dollar judgment for copyright infringement

"The court will hear its big copyright case for the year during the first week of the December session, when on Monday, Dec. 1, it reviews a billion-dollar ruling against Cox Communications based on its failure to eradicate copyright infringement by its customers."

OpenAI Risks Billions as Court Weighs Privilege in Copyright Row; Bloomberg Law, October 10, 2025

  

Annelise Levy

, Bloomberg Law; OpenAI Risks Billions as Court Weighs Privilege in Copyright Row

"Authors and publishers suing the artificial intelligence giant have secured access to some Slack messages and emails discussing OpenAI’s deletion of a dataset containing pirated books and are seeking additional attorney communications about the decision. If they succeed, the communications could demonstrate willful infringement, triggering enhanced damages of as much as $150,000 per work...

The US District Court for the Southern District of New York last week ordered OpenAI to turn over most employee communications about the data deletion that the AI company argued were protected by attorney-client privilege. OpenAI may appeal the decision. A separate bid for OpenAI’s correspondence with in-house and outside attorneys remains pending."

Is ‘The Pitt’ Really an ‘ER’ Spinoff? Michael Crichton’s Estate Says It Is.; The New York Times, September 12, 2025

Nicholas Kulish, The New York Times ; Is ‘The Pitt’ Really an ‘ER’ Spinoff? Michael Crichton’s Estate Says It Is.

The estate of the best-selling author, which has intellectual property rights to “ER,” and the creators of the new hit TV show are waging a legal battle over whether it’s a stealth reboot.

"On Nov. 4, the defendants asked the court to dismiss the complaint, citing their constitutional free speech rights and arguing that “The Pitt” is not a derivative work of “ER.” They emphasized that the new series is about the post-Covid world, reminding the judge that it deals with events that arose after Mr. Crichton’s death...

Rewatching “ER” through the lens of the lawsuit — as a jury might be asked to — can be a strange experience. Is the struggle over whether to put a dying elderly patient onto a ventilator a distinct plot point (this would support Team Crichton) or an everyday tragedy in a large urban hospital (Team Pitt)?

“‘The Pitt’ has no connection to ‘ER’ — it does not use ‘ER’’s intellectual property, characters, plot, setting or narrative pacing,” the defendants said. “While both series are medical dramas set in a hospital, this concept is hardly unique.” They name-checked “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Chicago Med,” “House” and “The Good Doctor.”...

The case “could serve as a model for how to figure out how much things are worth in the streaming space,” said Jennifer Porst, a professor of media industry studies at Emory University in Atlanta."

Anthropic Settles High-Profile AI Copyright Lawsuit Brought by Book Authors; Wired, August 26, 2025

Kate Knobs, Wired ; Anthropic Settles High-Profile AI Copyright Lawsuit Brought by Book Authors

"ANTHROPIC HAS REACHED a preliminary settlement in a class action lawsuit brought by a group of prominent authors, marking a major turn in one of the most significant ongoing AI copyright lawsuits in history. The move will allow Anthropic to avoid what could have been a financially devastating outcome in court."

Anthropic’s surprise settlement adds new wrinkle in AI copyright war; Reuters, August 27, 2025

 Blake Brittain, Reuters; Anthropic’s surprise settlement adds new wrinkle in AI copyright war

"Anthropic's class action settlement with a group of U.S. authors this week was a first, but legal experts said the case's distinct qualities complicate the deal's potential influence on a wave of ongoing copyright lawsuits against other artificial-intelligence focused companies like OpenAI, Microsoft and Meta Platforms.

Amazon-backed Anthropic was under particular pressure, with a trial looming in December after a judge found it liable for pirating millions of copyrighted books. The terms of the settlement, which require a judge's approval, are not yet public. And U.S. courts have just begun to wrestle with novel copyright questions related to generative AI, which could prompt other defendants to hold out for favorable rulings."

Getty Images Wants $1.7 Billion From its Lawsuit With Stability AI; PetaPixel, December 19, 2024

MATT GROWCOOT, PetaPixel; Getty Images Wants $1.7 Billion From its Lawsuit With Stability AI

"Getty, one of the world’s largest photo agencies, launched its lawsuit in January 2023. Getty suspects that Stability AI may have used as many as 12 million of its copyrighted photos to train the AI image generator Stable Diffusion. Getty is seeking $150,000 per infringement and 12 million photos equates to a staggering $1.8 trillion.

However, according to Stability AI’s latest company accounts as reported by Sifted, Getty is seeking damages for 11,383 works at $150,000 per infringement which comes to a total of $1.7 billion. Stability AI has previously reported that Getty was seeking damages for 7,300 images so that number has increased. But Stability AI says Getty hasn’t given an exact number it wants for the lawsuit to be settled, according to Sifted."

5th Circuit rules ISP should have terminated Internet users accused of piracy; Ars Technica, October 11, 2024

 JON BRODKIN, Ars Technica; 5th Circuit rules ISP should have terminated Internet users accused of piracy

"Music publishing companies notched another court victory against a broadband provider that refused to terminate the accounts of Internet users accused of piracy. In a ruling on Wednesday, the conservative-leaning US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit sided with the big three record labels against Grande Communications, a subsidiary of Astound Broadband.

The appeals court ordered a new trial on damages because it said the $46.8 million award was too high, but affirmed the lower court's finding that Grande is liable for contributory copyright infringement."

Supreme Court to Clarify Copyright Infringement Limits in Case Against Warner Music; The Hollywood Reporter, September 29, 2023

Winston Cho, The Hollywood Reporter; Supreme Court to Clarify Copyright Infringement Limits in Case Against Warner Music

"The Supreme Court will clear up how far back copyright holders can recover damages for infringement in a case involving a Florida producer who sued Warner Chappell Music after Flo Rida sampled a song he owns.

The justices agreed on Friday to review an appeal from Warner Music and Artist Publishing Group of a lower court’s ruling that recovery for damages that occurred prior to the three-year window to sue is allowed. The decision may clarify uncertainty over whether there is truly open-ended copyright liability, as two federal appeals courts have recently held."

A Photographer Tried to Get His Photos Removed from an AI Dataset. He Got an Invoice Instead.; Vice, April 28, 2023

Chloe Xiang, Vice ; A Photographer Tried to Get His Photos Removed from an AI Dataset. He Got an Invoice Instead.

"The legality of using copyrighted material to train AI is still very contentious and there has not yet been a precedent case that can be used to determine the validity of either side of the case."

Guns N' Roses sue online Texas gun and flower shop for trademark infringement; Entertainment Weekly, December 5, 2022

Jessica Wang, Entertainment Weekly; Guns N' Roses sue online Texas gun and flower shop for trademark infringement

"An online gun and floral shop in Texas might soon be knockin' on a courtroom door over a trademark infringement lawsuit filed on behalf of Guns N' Roses.

The rock band comprised of Axl Rose, Saul "Slash" Hudson, and Michael "Duff" McKagan filed a lawsuit Thursday against Jersey Village Florist, which operates the online shop Texas Guns and Roses, for wholesale appropriation and infringement of the Guns N' Roses name without the band's approval, license, or consent.

In the complaint obtained by EW, the band argues that the store's name is "likely to cause confusion" with the Guns N' Roses mark. It also, per the suit, "falsely suggested a connection" with the band that could "dilute" the name. The online shop has capitalized on the band's "goodwill, prestige, and fame" without permission, Guns N' Roses alleges, which has been "particularly damaging" given the nature of the business."

Jury orders Steve King's campaign to pay $750 for using copyrighted meme; Des Moines Register, November 18, 2022

 William Morris, Des Moines Register; 

Jury orders Steve King's campaign to pay $750 for using copyrighted meme

"King's campaign used Sam's photo, superimposed over a background of the U.S. Capitol, in a Facebook post in January 2020 urging supporters to "Fund our memes!!!" Laney Griner, who copyrighted the photo in 2012, sent a cease-and-desist letter soon after, and, in December 2020, sued King and his campaign for copyright infringement and invasion of privacy against Sam, now a teen...

The jury agreed that King's campaign violated the copyright and awarded $750 in damages, the minimum allowed by statute. But it did not find that King, who denied knowledge of the meme before it was posted, had personally violated the copyright. Jurors also found neither campaign nor candidate had invaded Sam Griner's privacy with the Facebook post...

Although used freely as a meme online, the photo also has commercial value. The Griners have licensed its use in ad campaigns and objected to King's unauthorized use of it for fundraising purposes, according to the complaint."

Who Owns the Copyright in A Tattoo?; Lexology, October 17, 2022

McKee Voorhees & Sease PLC - Brandon W. Clark, Lexology; Who Owns the Copyright in A Tattoo?

"In this, the first ever case of its kind to reach a jury, the jury found in favor of Alexander. However, the decision was something of a hollow victory for Alexander as the jury only awarded damages of $3,750. This case illustrates many of the issues with putting a copyright case in front of a jury as the court removed many of Take Two’s potential defenses from the jury’s consideration including de minimus use, an implied license, and waiver.

While the issues are novel and some of the case specific facts are fascinating, the outcome of the case could have a significant impact on copyrights and licensing for video games, television, motion pictures, and photographs. It is too early to tell what specific impact the result could have, and the minimal damages award will likely prevent an onslaught of similar cases, but the result does indicate a potential increase in risk when using someone’s name, image, and likeness, and will likely change the way these licenses are drafted in the future.

From a practical perspective, since copyright rights can only be transferred via a signed writing, the one sure way to avoid this risk is to ensure that tattoo artists sign a copyright assignment at the time the work is completed."

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex to receive confidential sum from UK newspaper for copyright infringement; CNN, January 5, 2022

Niamh Kennedy, CNN; Meghan, Duchess of Sussex to receive confidential sum from UK newspaper for copyright infringement

"The court found ANL infringed Meghan's copyright by publishing extracts of a handwritten letter she sent to her father in The Mail on Sunday newspaper and Mail Online website during hearings in January and May last year, the court order says.

The group is also set to pay the duchess £1 in nominal damages for misuse of private information, according to the court order.

On December 2, the Court of Appeal upheld a ruling that ANL had misused Meghan's private information through their publication of the letter, saying the Duchess had "had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of the letter.""

The Copyright Lawsuit in Tiger King Is an Outrage; Slate, May 7, 2020

Joshua Lamel, Slate; The Copyright Lawsuit in Tiger King Is an Outrage

"Copyright is the perfect vehicle for SLAPP suits. First of all, copyright is a government-granted, exclusive right to speech. There is no better way to prevent someone from publicly criticizing you than to use copyright law. Copyright lawsuits are expensive and place enormous costs on defendants. Fair use has to be raised once you are sued, so defendants will likely have to spend more. The potential damages are extreme: For every violation of a copyright, you can get $150,000 in statutory damages. Additionally, copyright law has injunctive relief—you can actually stop the speech from happening.

One would think that Congress would recognize this and specifically include copyright in federal anti-SLAPP efforts. But that is not happening anytime soon. Instead, thanks to their lobbying and fundraising, copyright holders have been successful in convincing senior members of Congress in both parties to exclude copyright. These members have told federal anti-SLAPP advocates that they need to be willing to give up copyright for a chance of being successful. There is not a single good policy argument to exclude copyright. Copyright litigation abuse is exactly what anti-SLAPP legislation should be designed to prevent. This type of abuse is the reason we need a federal fix.

In my dream world, the saturation of Joe Exotic’s story will help everyday Americans understand the relevance of copyright law in our daily lives—maybe even spur federal lawmakers to introduce and pass anti-SLAPP law without a special carve-out for copyright."

CalTech wins $1.1 billion jury verdict in patent case against Apple, Broadcom; Reuters, January 29, 2020

Jan Wolfe, Stephen Nellis, Reuters; CalTech wins $1.1 billion jury verdict in patent case against Apple, Broadcom

"The California Institute of Technology said on Wednesday that it won a $1.1 billion jury verdict in a patent case against Apple (AAPL.O) and Broadcom (AVGO.O). 

In a case filed in federal court in Los Angeles in 2016, the Pasadena, California-based research university alleged that Broadcom wi-fi chips used in hundreds of millions of Apple iPhones infringed patents relating to data transmission technology."

Judge Lets NMPA Double Damages to $300M in Peloton Copyright Suit; Billboard, September 28, 2019

Tatiana Cirisano, Billboard; Judge Lets NMPA Double Damages to $300M in Peloton Copyright Suit

"A Manhattan federal judge has approved the National Music Publishers' Association's (NMPA) request to double damages to $300 million in a lawsuit against Peloton, for the exercise startup's alleged use of more than 2,000 songs in its workout videos without the proper licenses."

Two skyline photo cases, two different results; Lexology, August 9, 2018

Thompson Coburn LLP - Mark Sableman, 

Lexology; Two skyline photo cases, two different results

"Two cases involving photographs of city skylines illustrate what is, and isn’t, copyright infringement."

Judge Orders Chinese Wind-Turbine Maker To Pay $59 Million For Stealing Trade Secrets; NPR, July 6, 2018

Jim Zarroli, NPR; Judge Orders Chinese Wind-Turbine Maker To Pay $59 Million For Stealing Trade Secrets

"A federal judge has ordered China's largest wind-turbine firm, Sinovel, to pay $59 million for stealing trade secrets from a Massachusetts-based technology company.

Last January, Sinovel was found guilty of stealing trade secrets in federal criminal court in Madison, Wis. The company paid an Austria-based employee of American Superconductor Corp. to steal its source code for software that powered wind turbines.

This kind of intellectual property theft has been highlighted by the Trump administration as a reason for levying 25 percent tariffs on $34 billion of Chinese goods entering the U.S., which began on Friday. China retaliated with tariffs on $34 billion worth of U.S. goods."