- within Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)
- in United States
- within Law Department Performance, Accounting and Audit and Law Practice Management topic(s)
Takeaway: Available now is the recent article in the Legal Intelligencer by Justin Donoho entitled "Gen AI Class Action Key Decisions and Trends in 2025." The article is available here and is a must-read for corporate counsel involved with gen AI technologies.
This year has been a busy one in the generative artificial intelligence (gen AI) class action litigation landscape. New pleadings were filed, including several new class actions, several consolidated and amended complaints, and one appeal. Several key decisions were issued, including a trio that formed a three-way split of authority on how to determine whether training a gen AI model on copyrighted materials constitutes "fair use" under the Copyright Act. Additionally, one humongous settlement was reached. Additional notable decisions issued in 2025 in gen AI class actions include a decision denying class certification on the basis of the class definition being defined as a "fail-safe" class, dispositive decisions defining the contours of claims alleging that gen AI developers violated the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, a decision on the copyrightability of voice in the context of voice cloning technology, and multiple additional decisions on motions to compel, further clarifying the scope of documents that may or may not be discoverable in gen AI class actions. This article analyzes these key decisions and trends.
Implications For Corporations
With gen AI continuing to proliferate and the current presidential administration continuing the prior administration's policy goals of sustaining and enhancing America's global AI dominance, gen AI litigation is multiplying. We should expect to see an upward trend of key decisions and new cases in the remainder of this year and beyond as this burgeoning area of the law continues to unfold.
Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm's full disclaimer.
