Developing Technology Lawsuits: AI Copyright, Antitrust, and Privacy

Technology development lawsuits in the United States now cluster in a handful of active fronts: copyright claims over the data used to train artificial intelligence, federal antitrust cases against the largest platforms, product-liability suits alleging social media was designed to addict children, whistleblower and consumer suits over AI safety and self-driving claims, patent battles, and privacy class actions. Together they are rewriting the rules for how software gets built, how data gets acquired, and what a technology company can promise the public.

AI Copyright Lawsuits Over Training Data

Roughly 75 AI copyright suits have been filed since 2022, with about 47 aimed at AI companies in the United States as of mid-2025.1Authors Alliance. AI Class Action Litigation Update: Books — Where Things Stand in Early 2026 Authors, visual artists, music publishers, news organizations, and software developers have all sued. The central legal question is whether training a model on copyrighted work is fair use, and the answer courts are giving depends heavily on how the training data was obtained.

Bartz v. Anthropic

The most consequential ruling so far came in Bartz v. Anthropic, a class action in the Northern District of California brought by authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson against the maker of the Claude chatbot. In June 2025, Judge William Alsup split the question. Training on legally purchased books, he held, is “quintessentially transformative” and protected as fair use. Downloading and keeping books from shadow libraries such as Library Genesis and the Pirate Library Mirror, he wrote, is “inherently, irredeemably infringing.”2Ropes Gray. A Tale of Three Cases: How Fair Use Is Playing Out in AI Copyright Lawsuits

Rather than try the piracy claims, Anthropic agreed to pay $1.5 billion, the largest copyright settlement in U.S. history. The class covers rightsholders of about 500,000 books Anthropic acquired from shadow libraries, provided the works were registered with the U.S. Copyright Office and carry an ISBN or ASIN. Individual payouts are estimated at roughly $3,000 per eligible title, split by default evenly between authors and publishers. Anthropic must destroy all pirated copies within 30 days of final judgment. Judge Alsup granted preliminary approval in September 2025, and the final fairness hearing is set for May 2026.3Authors Guild. What Authors Need to Know About the Anthropic Settlement

Kadrey v. Meta

Two days after Bartz, a different judge in the same courthouse reached the opposite result. In Kadrey v. Meta Platforms, thirteen authors sued Meta for using shadow library books to train its Llama models. Judge Vince Chhabria granted summary judgment for Meta, calling the use “highly transformative” and noting that the plaintiffs failed to produce concrete evidence of market harm or dilution. He emphasized the ruling was narrow and tied to the record before him.2Ropes Gray. A Tale of Three Cases: How Fair Use Is Playing Out in AI Copyright Lawsuits The two decisions together tell plaintiffs where the fight is winnable: on the source of the data and on real evidence of market injury.

The OpenAI MDL

The largest pending AI copyright case is the consolidated multidistrict litigation against OpenAI and Microsoft in the Southern District of New York, combining at least 16 suits from news organizations, authors, and others before Judge Sidney Stein, with Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang overseeing discovery.4CourtListener. In Re: OpenAI, Inc. Copyright Infringement Litigation In January 2026, Judge Stein affirmed an order compelling OpenAI to produce 20 million de-identified ChatGPT conversation logs, reasoning that the broader set is relevant to whether ChatGPT’s outputs substitute for copyrighted material.5Jones Walker. OpenAI Loses Privacy Gambit: 20 Million ChatGPT Logs Likely Headed to Copyright Plaintiffs Encyclopedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster joined the case in March 2026 with their own complaint.6Law360. In Re OpenAI Inc Copyright Infringement Litigation

Other AI Copyright Cases Worth Tracking

Newer filings increasingly follow the Bartz playbook, attacking how training data was obtained rather than the act of training itself.1Authors Alliance. AI Class Action Litigation Update: Books — Where Things Stand in Early 2026

Big Tech Antitrust Cases

Google Search

In August 2024, Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google violated the Sherman Act, writing in a 277-page opinion that “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.” After a 15-day remedies trial in May 2025, he ordered Google to stop entering exclusive distribution contracts for Google Search, Chrome, and related products, and to share certain search index and user-interaction data with rival search engines and generative AI companies. He rejected the DOJ’s request to force a sale of Chrome.9U.S. Department of Justice. Department of Justice Wins Significant Remedies Against Google In May 2026, Judge Mehta denied Google’s motion for a partial stay, letting the data-sharing and syndication requirements take effect.10National Law Journal. Antitrust Remedies Order Takes Effect as U.S. Judge Denies Google’s Stay Motion Google filed its appeal with the D.C. Circuit on May 22, 2026, arguing the judge “overstepped” and “improperly applied antitrust law.”11New York Times. Google Appeals Search Case

Google Ad Tech

In a separate case, Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled in April 2025 that Google monopolized publisher ad servers and ad exchanges. A remedies trial ended in November 2025, with the DOJ seeking divestiture of Google’s AdX exchange. A remedies decision was pending in early 2026.12Tech Policy Press. Looking Ahead on US Antitrust Enforcement and Tech

Meta

The FTC’s long-running case accusing Meta of building a social networking monopoly through its Instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions was dismissed at trial. In November 2025, Judge James Boasberg ruled that Meta does not hold monopoly power once TikTok and YouTube are counted as competitors. The FTC appealed in January 2026, maintaining that “Meta violated our antitrust laws when it acquired Instagram and WhatsApp.”13New York Times. FTC Meta Antitrust Appeal

Apple and Amazon

The DOJ’s 2024 smartphone-monopoly case against Apple survived a motion to dismiss in June 2025 and is now in discovery, with the two sides fighting over Apple’s demand for records from 14 federal agencies.149to5Mac. Apple Says U.S. Is Refusing to Produce Federal Agency Documents in DOJ Antitrust Case Separately, in the ongoing Epic Games v. Apple proceedings, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers found in April 2025 that Apple had violated her 2021 injunction on App Store payment competition and referred the company to federal prosecutors for a criminal contempt investigation.15CNN. Apple App Store Competition Ruling The FTC’s antitrust case against Amazon over its online retail and marketplace practices is now set for a bench trial beginning February 9, 2027, after Amazon lost a bid to keep an earlier October 2026 date.16MLex. Amazon Loses Bid to Keep October 2026 Trial Date for US FTC Antitrust Case

Social Media Harm to Children

Thousands of suits alleging that social platforms were built to addict young users are starting to produce jury verdicts. On March 25, 2026, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and YouTube liable for harms to a plaintiff identified as “KGM” (Kaley), awarding $6 million: $3 million compensatory and $3 million punitive. Meta was assigned 70% of the liability. Snapchat and TikTok had settled with the plaintiff before trial on confidential terms. The same day, a New Mexico jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million in a case brought by the state attorney general for failing to protect minors from predators and misleading consumers about platform safety, with a second trial phase scheduled for May 2026.17NPR. Meta YouTube Social Media Trial Verdict

The federal multidistrict litigation, In re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, has consolidated over 2,500 cases before Judge Gonzalez Rogers in the Northern District of California. Six bellwether school district cases are queued for trial, with the first (Breathitt County, Kentucky) set for June 15, 2026.18MDL Update. Social Media Adolescent Addiction MDL Eighteen state attorneys general have filed a joint suit against Meta and are pushing for a single consolidated trial.19Multistate. Social Media Liability Litigation Seeks Foothold in Tort Law

Plaintiffs have avoided Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which historically immunized platforms from liability for user-posted content, by framing their claims around platform design choices rather than the content itself. State lower courts have almost uniformly agreed that Section 230 does not bar claims aimed at a platform’s own algorithmic design and addictive features.19Multistate. Social Media Liability Litigation Seeks Foothold in Tort Law Meta and Google have said they disagree with the verdicts and plan to appeal.20First Amendment MTSU. As Juries Turn Against Social Media for Harming Kids, Big Tech’s Invincibility Starts to Show Cracks

Autonomous Driving Claims

Tesla and Elon Musk face multiple suits alleging misrepresentation of “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving.” The California DMV filed a false advertising complaint in July 2022 arguing the product names implied autonomy the cars could not deliver; Tesla answered that its marketing warned drivers to remain in control, and in February 2026 the DMV decided not to suspend Tesla’s sales in the state.21Los Angeles Times. Has Musk Lied About Self-Driving Teslas? California Says So

A shareholder suit citing more than 20 allegedly false or misleading statements by Musk or Tesla since 2019 was dismissed by a federal judge in 2024 after the court accepted Tesla’s argument that many statements were “mere corporate puffery.” The plaintiffs have appealed. In a federal case in Miami brought by families of two people killed in a collision involving a Tesla with Autopilot engaged, Judge Beth Bloom ruled that “a reasonable jury could find that [Tesla acted in reckless disregard] of human life for the sake of developing their product and maximizing profit,” and authorized the plaintiffs to seek punitive damages. Tesla has settled at least three suits over fatal crashes tied to its self-driving systems, including one involving an Apple engineer, with terms undisclosed.21Los Angeles Times. Has Musk Lied About Self-Driving Teslas? California Says So

AI Safety Whistleblower Suit

In June 2026, former xAI engineer Devin Kim filed a whistleblower retaliation suit against xAI and SpaceX in Santa Clara County Superior Court, alleging he was fired in September 2025 for repeatedly raising safety concerns about the Grok chatbot. The complaint says Kim warned that inadequate testing left Grok vulnerable to racial and political bias and that the model lacked safeguards against dangerous outputs, including content that could facilitate bioterrorism. Kim alleges that xAI co-founder Jimmy Ba, his supervisor, ignored company safety directives to prioritize performance and tried to circumvent EU safety regulations during the August 2025 release of “Grok Code 1” by misrepresenting the model to avoid legally required testing.22TechCrunch. xAI Fired an Engineer Who Raised Alarms About Grok Safety, New Lawsuit Claims Kim is seeking restoration of forfeited equity, compensatory and punitive damages, and a declaration that the defendants’ conduct was unlawful under California labor and consumer protection statutes.23Yahoo News. Whistleblower Sues Elon Musk’s xAI SpaceX was named because xAI and X were folded into its corporate structure ahead of a planned IPO. Neither company had publicly responded as of mid-June 2026.

Patent Litigation

Patent lawsuits remain a steady cost of doing business in tech. After a dip in 2023, filings jumped to 3,806 cases in 2024, up 22%, and 94 cases produced a combined $4.35 billion in damages that year.24USPTO PTAB. Lex Machina Patent Litigation Report 2025 Growth has been driven mainly by patent assertion entities, sometimes called patent trolls, which acquire portfolios and enforce them through litigation rather than making products. In wireless and cellular cases, up to half of all plaintiffs are non-practicing entities.25IPWatchdog. U.S. Patent Litigation Trends in 2025: Patterns Behind the Numbers Samsung, Amazon, and Google are the most frequently targeted defendants, and the Eastern District of Texas retook the top spot for case volume in 2024 with over 1,000 filings. Virtual reality hardware is the fastest-growing subject area, up roughly tenfold over the past decade.

Data Privacy Class Actions

Privacy suits keep pressure on how companies handle user data. In February 2026, a federal judge granted final approval to a class action settlement alleging Google’s real-time bidding advertising system illegally sold personal data, including geolocation and interests, to advertisers without user consent. The settlement pays no cash to class members but requires Google to build a new control letting U.S. users limit information shared in ad auctions. Plaintiffs valued the change at $1.4 billion; Google put it at a minimum of $740 million.26Courthouse News Service. Google Agrees to New Privacy Features in Class Action Settlement A separate case, In re Google Assistant Privacy Litigation, alleges Google Assistant recorded users through false activations without the “Okay Google” wake word and used the audio to improve speech recognition. A settlement has been reached, with a preliminary approval hearing scheduled for March 2026 and the amount not made public.27Google Assistant Privacy Litigation. In Re Google Assistant Privacy Litigation

Deepfakes and Right of Publicity

Generative AI’s ability to clone voices and faces has produced both litigation and legislative proposals. The estate of George Carlin sued the podcast Dudesy for an unauthorized AI replication of Carlin’s voice; the case settled, with the defendant agreeing to remove the content and stop future use of Carlin’s likeness. The ongoing Lehrman v. Lovo case in the Southern District of New York involves voice actors alleging a company used their voices in a generative text-to-speech tool without permission. The NO FAKES Act, introduced in the Senate in July 2024, would create the first federal right of publicity covering AI-generated replicas.28Columbia Law Review. A New Age of Publicity: The NO FAKES Act and Federal Regulation on AI Replicas For now, 25 states have their own right-of-publicity statutes, with significant variation in scope and duration.29Crowell & Moring. AI and the Right of Publicity: A Patchwork of State Laws the Only Guidance for Now

The Coming Preemption Fight

Legislation is starting to reshape the terrain that lawsuits fight over. In December 2025, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence,” directing the Attorney General to establish a task force to challenge state AI laws deemed inconsistent with federal policy, and instructing the Secretary of Commerce to evaluate state AI regulations for those that are “onerous.” The order singled out a Colorado law banning algorithmic discrimination and directed the FCC and FTC to consider preempting state AI laws through federal standards.30White House. Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence

All 50 states have introduced AI legislation, and 38 states enacted roughly 100 measures in 2025 alone, ranging from Montana’s “Right to Compute” law on AI-controlled critical infrastructure, to New York’s requirement that state agencies publish inventories of automated decision-making tools, to Oregon’s prohibition on AI agents using licensed medical professional titles.31NCSL. Artificial Intelligence 2025 Legislation Congress has introduced over 150 AI-related bills across the 118th and 119th sessions, though none had been enacted as of late 2025.32Brennan Center for Justice. Artificial Intelligence Legislation Tracker The collision between federal preemption efforts and aggressive state regulation is itself likely to produce the next wave of technology development lawsuits.