Copyright lawsuits over generative AI will continue throughout 2025.
Unresolvable The public record could not settle it.
Prediction: Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
The second judge would not resolve this claim; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
What would count as true or false
The claim is that copyright lawsuits over generative AI would remain active throughout 2025. True: copyright lawsuits against generative AI companies were pending or newly filed across 2025, from early through late in the year (for example NYT v. OpenAI, Getty v. Stability AI, or authors' suits against Anthropic or Meta). Mostly true: litigation continued for most of 2025 but notably wound down near year-end, for example through settlements, while some cases stayed active. Mixed: active litigation existed for only about half the year. Mostly false: nearly all such cases were resolved early in 2025, with only marginal activity later. False: there were no active generative-AI copyright lawsuits for most of 2025.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (4)
-
E1 September/October 2025 Decisions in Brief American Bar Association (Landslide magazine, IP Law section) · September 2025
“The Southern District of New York denied a motion to dismiss copyright and trademark claims against OpenAI based on its alleged misuse of the plaintiffs’ content in developing ChatGPT.”
-
E2 September/October 2025 Decisions in Brief American Bar Association (Landslide magazine, IP Law section) · September 2025
“In several cases before the Southern District of New York brought by the New York Times, the Daily News, and the Center for Investigative Reporting (CIR) against Microsoft and OpenAI and related defendants, Microsoft and OpenAI moved to dismiss several of the copyright and trademark claims.”
-
E3 Kadrey et al v. Meta Platforms, Inc., 3:2023cv03417 - Document 598 (N.D. Cal. 2025) Justia Law (reproducing U.S. District Court, N.D. Cal. filing) · 25 June 2025
“Court Description: ORDER Denying the Plaintiffs' 482 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Granting Meta's 501 Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Vince Chhabria on 6/25/2025.”
-
E4 [US] Lawsuit filed by Disney & Universal against Midjourney European Audiovisual Observatory (IRIS Legal Observations)
“Disney and Universal filed a lawsuit against Midjourney for direct and secondary copyright infringement before the United States District Court for the Central District of California on 11 June 2025”
Reasoning
The evidence shows copyright litigation was active between June 2025 [E4, E5] and the September/October 2025 roundup [E2, E3]. None of it covers early 2025 or the end of the year, so it cannot show whether cases continued throughout the year or wound down near year-end, as the criteria require.
Cite this claim
Gary Marcus, “Copyright lawsuits over generative AI will continue throughout 2025.” (said 1 January 2025). Verdict: unresolvable. Reliability API, claim c_7f3e6afc9f9f, method 0.1.0+c876030c, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_7f3e6afc9f9f
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More prediction claims by Gary Marcus
-
Resolved true
“AI Safety Institutes will also offer guidance, but have little legal authority to stop truly dangerous models should they arise.”
-
Resolved true
“The US will continue to have very little regulation protecting its consumers from the risks of generative AI.”
-
Mostly true
“Some of its advice will be head-scratchingly bad.”
-
Mostly true
“GPT-5 will surely be better, a lot better than GPT-4.”
-
Resolved true
“GPT-5 really is about to drop, no foolin’.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.