AI Lawsuit Tracker
The legal fights that will decide what AI is allowed to do — copyright, trade secrets, and corporate governance. Each case below is summarized neutrally, with the parties, where it stands, what’s at stake, and a source you can check.
- ActiveTrade secrets
Apple v. OpenAI
At stake: Whether OpenAI misappropriated Apple hardware trade secrets to build its own AI devices.
Filed July 10, 2026. Apple alleges OpenAI recruited Apple staff and obtained confidential hardware information; OpenAI says it has "no interest in other companies’ trade secrets." Unproven allegations; litigation just beginning.
- ActiveCopyright
Record Labels v. Suno & Udio
At stake: Whether training AI music generators on copyrighted recordings is fair use.
Partly resolved: UMG settled with Udio (Oct 2025) and Warner settled with Suno (Nov 2025), pairing payments with licensing deals. Sony continues to litigate and Suno is contesting on fair-use grounds, with a pivotal hearing expected in summer 2026.
- ActiveCopyright
The New York Times v. OpenAI & Microsoft
At stake: Whether training on and reproducing Times articles is copyright infringement or fair use — the marquee AI copyright case.
Ongoing in discovery as the lead case in a consolidated group of ~16 news suits. Core infringement claims survived a motion to dismiss; in July 2026 the publishers moved to sanction OpenAI over discovery conduct. No trial date or settlement.
- ActiveCopyright
UMG, Concord & ABKCO v. Anthropic
At stake: Whether reproducing copyrighted song lyrics in training and outputs infringes.
Ongoing. Publishers filed an amended complaint in January 2026 seeking about $3.1 billion in damages. Distinct from the separately settled Bartz book-authors case.
- Key rulingCopyright
Kadrey v. Meta
At stake: Whether training Llama on copyrighted books is fair use.
In June 2025 the court granted summary judgment for Meta on fair use — but narrowly, stressing the authors had not shown market harm rather than blessing AI training in general.
- Key rulingCopyright
Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence
At stake: Whether using Westlaw headnotes to build a competing legal-research AI is fair use.
In February 2025 the court ruled there was no fair use — an early, influential decision against an AI company, though it involved non-generative AI competing directly with the source product.
- On appealCopyright
Getty Images v. Stability AI
At stake: Whether training image models on Getty’s catalog infringes copyright and trademarks.
In the UK (Nov 2025) the High Court rejected Getty’s main copyright claim (finding model weights are not a "copy", with training-location issues) and found only limited trademark infringement; Getty was granted permission to appeal in Dec 2025. A separate U.S. case continues in California.
- SettledCopyright
Bartz v. Anthropic
At stake: Whether training on books — including copies from "shadow libraries" — is lawful.
Settled for about $1.5 billion (~$3,000 per work across ~500,000 works) — reported as the largest copyright settlement in U.S. history. A key ruling held that training can be fair use, but storing pirated copies is not.
- DismissedGovernance / contract
Musk v. OpenAI (Altman)
At stake: Whether OpenAI betrayed its founding non-profit mission by shifting to a for-profit structure.
In May 2026 a jury found Musk sued too late (statute of limitations) and the judge tossed the case. Musk’s counsel said he will appeal. (A contract/governance dispute, not a copyright case.)
No cases match that filter.
What the status labels mean
- Active
- Filed and ongoing — in discovery or pre-trial, no merits ruling yet.
- Key ruling
- A significant ruling has issued; the case may continue or head to appeal.
- On appeal
- A decision has been reached and is being appealed.
- Settled
- Resolved by settlement — usually with no court ruling on the merits.
- Dismissed
- Dismissed or decided against the plaintiff (may be appealed).
This tracker is a map, not legal advice, and case summaries are drawn neutrally from public reporting — allegations are allegations until a court decides. Litigation moves fast, so the source link on each case is the source of truth; confirm the latest there. Spotted an error or a case we’re missing? Tell us — corrections welcome.