Blogs
June 3, 2026

Top Noteworthy Copyright Stories from May 2026

by Rachel Kim

May 2026 was another busy month in the copyright world, with numerous new AI copyright lawsuits being filed in the courts. Congress was also busy with an oversight hearing of the U.S. Copyright Office and moving certain copyright-related bills, including passing a bill out of a key Congressional committee concerning the appointment process of the Register of Copyrights. Here is an overview of key pieces of copyright news from May 2026.

USCO Receives 80 Comments in Response to Fee Study NPRM: By the May 4 deadline, the U.S. Copyright Office received 81 comments submitted in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding the proposed adoption of a new fee schedule for Copyright Office services. The Copyright Alliance also submitted comments highlighting concerns that the Copyright Office’s proposal to increase fees and to eliminate the Single Application registration option will create undue barriers for and discourage individual creators and copyright owners from participating in the copyright registration system.

USCO Publishes NPRM Updating the Definition of ‘News Website’: On May 28, the U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which clarifies the definition of a “news website” under the regulations governing the group registration option for updates to news websites. According to the Copyright Office, the updated definition reflects that: “(1) a news website can cover a variety of subjects, (2) the primary function of the website must be to report on current events, and (3) the news content must be updated frequently. All other aspects of the final rule published in July 2024 remain unchanged.” The Office’s deadline for comments is Monday, June 29. More information is available on the rulemaking webpage.

Publishers and Author Scott Turow Bring Class Action AI Lawsuit Against Meta: On May 5, five major publishers—Elsevier, Cengage Learning, Hachette Book Group, Macmillan Publishing Group, and best-selling author Scott Turow—brought a class-action lawsuit against Meta and its founder/CEO Mark Zuckerberg for copyright infringement of millions of literary works to develop Meta’s Llama large language models (LLMs). The plaintiffs allege that defendants are liable for the illegal torrenting and use of millions of copyright books and journal articles from pirate websites and downloaded unauthorized web scrapes from the internet. The complaint includes claims of direct copyright infringement, contributory copyright infringement, and removal/alteration of Copyright Management Information (CMI).

CNN Sues Perplexity Over Unlicensed AI Training: On May 28, CNN filed a complaint against Perplexity over the unlicensed use of CNN stories, photographs, videos, and other works to train Perplexity’s AI tools. In the complaint, CNN stated that it engaged in negotiation talks with Perplexity last year regarding licensing arrangements, but, when negotiations fell through, Perplexity opted to steal the works instead. The complaint includes claims of direct copyright infringement, secondary copyright infringement, and trademark infringement.

Authors and Independent Musicians File More AI Copyright Lawsuits: In May, multiple individual creators, including authors and musicians filed several lawsuits against AI companies, bringing the total number of AI copyright lawsuits to more than 110 cases, including:

  • On May 12, Poseidon Wave Music filed a complaint against Suno over the unlicensed use of its sound recordings to train Suno’s AI model. The complaint includes one claim of direct copyright infringement.
  • On May 13, a group of 28 book authors, including Angie Cruz, Sean Arbabi, and others, filed a complaint against Anthropic over the unlicensed use of their books to develop Anthropic’s Claude large language model. The authors had opted out of the Bartz v. Anthropic settlement to pursue this lawsuit on their own. On May 15, a group of 34 book authors, including R.O. Kwon, Alexander Dreihann-Holenia, Chang-Rae Lee, and others, filed a similar complaint against Anthropic.
  • On May 18, author Molly Tanzer brought a class-action lawsuit against Adobe over the unlicensed use of books to develop the Nemotron and Slim LM AI models.
  • On May 22, authors Jeff Hobbs and A. Douglas Stone brought a class-action lawsuit against Meta, its researchers, and Mark Zuckerberg for the use of pirated copies of their books to train Meta’s Llama large language model.

USCO Sued Over Refusal to Register AI-Generated Image: On May 8, Ankit Sahni filed a complaint in the Central District of California against the U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) over its refusal to register an AI-generated image, titled “Suryast,” which was generated using the RAGHAV artificial intelligence painting app. Sahni claimed that he authored the image because he used his sunset photograph to prompt the AI tool to generate an image reminiscent of Van Gogh’s The Starry Night. The Copyright Office refused the registration application in December 2023 on the basis that the image lacked copyrightable human expression.

Court Awards $19.5 Million to Publishers in Lawsuit Against Anna’s Archive: On May 19, the district court for the Southern District of New York issued a collective $19.5 million default judgment for a group of publisher-plaintiffs,including Apress Media, Cengage, Elsevier, Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins, John Wiley & Sons, Macmillan, McGraw Hill, Penguin Random House, and Simon and Schuster in their lawsuit against the pirate website, Anna’s Archive, and its operators over the unauthorized reproduction, downloading, and distribution of plaintiffs’ literary works. The court awarded the maximum rate of $150,000 in statutory damages for the 10 works at issue in the lawsuit (which amounts to $19.5 million collectively for all Plaintiffs).

Court Denies NVIDIA’s Motion to Dismiss Contributory Liability Claims in AI Case Post ‘Cox v. Sony’: On May 5, the district court for the Northern District of California issued an order granting in part and denying in part NVIDIA’s motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit brought against it by a group of authors. In denying the motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ contributory liability claims, the court noted that plaintiffs adequately alleged inducement because it noted that NVIDIA took specific steps of developing and distributing code to download and extract copyrighted files to its customers. The court additionally stated, “That the NeMo Megatron Framework as a whole may have other, non-infringing uses does not alter this conclusion.”

Settlement Hearing Moves ‘Bartz v. Anthropic’ Toward Final Approval: On May 14, a hearing was held before Judge Martínez-Olguín in the Northern District of California to consider final approval of Anthropic’s proposed $1.5 billion settlement with authors over the AI developer’s use of pirated copies of the authors’ works for training. During the hearing, class counsel informed the court that the class now has a 92.77% participation rate for the works in the works list (with a $3,100 payout per work). Class counsel also explained that the number of opt outs remains low at just 350 authors. Further, the court heard from a number of authors who object to the settlement for various reasons, including insufficient notice and inadequate payouts for works registered using group registrations. Rather than focusing on the objections, Judge Martínez-Olguín’s questioned class counsel attorneys’ fees request and the structure of the cost reserve. The order also says that the court does not require anything more from the objectors nor will it consider any further submissions from them.

Sony Music Requests to Expand AI Lawsuit Against Udio by Adding More Than 60k Works to the Complaint: On May 22, Sony Music Entertainment filed a motion to amend its complaint to add 61,026 sound recordings in its lawsuit against Udio over the AI company’s unlicensed use of such works to train its AI music model. The motion was filed after Sony discovered and identified tens of thousands of works when it accessed Udio’s training data during the discovery process. By adding the new works to the lawsuit, potential damages reportedly could top $9 billion.

Court Denies Minimax’s Bid to Dismiss Movie Studios’ AI Lawsuit: On May 22, the district court for the Central District of California issued an order denying defendants’, Chinese and Singaporean AI companies Minimax, SXJT, and Nanoble, motion to dismiss the lawsuit brought against them by Disney, Warner Bros, and Universal over the unlicensed use of the studios’ works to train defendants’ generative AI video model, Hailuo. The court found that the complaint contained sufficient evidence and facts to support the legal claims and that there was enough evidence to establish personal jurisdiction over the defendants.

DC Court Says Public Docket Access Does Not Void Copyright Protections: On May 25, the district court for the District of Columbia denied motions to dismiss made by criminal defense attorneys in three separate lawsuits brought against them by jury consultant Lindsay Olson over unlicensed use of a 27-page jury-attitude study she prepared for a trial. The court found that because Olson had a valid copyright registration, she had prima facie evidence of copyright validity and that placing a copyrighted work in a public court file does not extinguish property interests.

SJC IP Subcommittee USCO Oversight Hearing: On May 12, the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) IP Subcommittee held an Oversight Hearing of the U.S. Copyright Office with Register Shira Perlmutter as the sole witness. Members participating in this hearing included Chairman Tillis (R-NC), Ranking Member Schiff (D-CA), and Senators Blackburn (R-TN), Hirono (D-HI), Welch (D-VT), Coons (D-DE), and Padilla (D-CA). Topics covered included the BLOCK BEARD Act and no-fault injunctions against foreign piracy sites, AI training transparency (including the Transparency and Responsibility for Artificial Intelligence Networks (TRAIN) Act, Copyright Labeling and Ethical AI Reporting (CLEAR) Act, the application of fair use to AI training, the impact of Cox v. Sony, the TRUMP American AI Act framework, the Visual Artists Copyright Reform Act (VACRA), and copyright protection for AI-generated outputs. Register Perlmutter also addressed the Copyright Office’s proposed fee schedule, its request for additional appropriations for modernization, the operation of the Copyright Claims Board (CCB) and proposed reforms, and the Office’s institutional position within the legislative branch. She also stated that post-Cox v. Sony, the time may be appropriate for legislative reform to address shortcomings created by the court decision in secondary copyright infringement law and the impacts to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

House Administration Committee Passes LOC and USCO Appointment Bill: On March 14, the Committee on House Administration held a full committee markup on various bills, including H.R. 6028 (starting at 46:50 in the video), the Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act. During the markup, an Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute (ANS) to H.R. 6028 from Representative Griffith (R-VA) was unanimously passed out of committee by a vote of 11-0. Among other things, the bill makes the Librarian of Congress a Congressional appointee and makes the Register of Copyrights a Presidential appointee confirmed by the Senate. Chairman Steil (R-WI), Ranking Member Morelle (D-NY), and Representative Griffith (R-VA) discussed the importance of maintaining the relationship between the Library of Congress and the Copyright Office and affirmed that the Office should remain in the legislative branch.

Updated Version of NO FAKES Act Introduced: On May 20, Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Chris Coons (D-DE), Thom Tillis (R-NC), and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), along with Representatives Maria Salazar (R-FL) and Madeleine Dean (D-PA) reintroduced the Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe (NO FAKES) Act, which would create a federal right protecting an individual’s voice and visual likeness from unauthorized digital replicas and generative AI misuse. Introduced as S. 4951 in the Senate and as H.R. 8915 in the House, the latest version of this legislation is endorsed by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), SAG-AFTRA, the Motion Picture Association (MPA), YouTube, Recording Academy, Universal Music Group (UMG), IBM, TikTok, OpenAI, Disney, Human Artistry Campaign, Department for Professional Employees at AFL-CIO (DPE), AFL-CIO, National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA), American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), Authors Guild, CreativeFuture, American Bar Association, National Association of Voice Actors (NAVA), Music Artists Coalition (MAC), Songwriters of North America (SONA), Getty Images, American Federation of Musicians, and many others.

Rep. Ross Reintroduces the Protect Working Musicians Act: On May 21, Representative Deborah Ross (D-NC) reintroduced H.R. 8994, The Protect Working Musicians Act (PWMA), which would create safe harbors from antitrust laws for individual musicians who own the copyrights to their sound recordings if they collectively negotiate music licensing terms with large online music platforms and generative AI companies or if they collectively refuse to license their works to such groups. Representatives Cohen (D-TN) and Doggett (D-TX) are cosponsors of the bill. The bill was originally introduced in 2021 and reintroduced in 2023. The current bill is endorsed by the American Association of Independent Music (A2IM), the Artist Rights Alliance (ARA), American Federation of Musicians (AFM), Authors Guild, Recording Academy, Music Artists Coalition, National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA), Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television & Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), Society of Composers & Lyricists, Songwriters Of North America (SONA), Songwriters Guild of America, and others.

UK Government Responds to Parliament Report on AI Copyright Issues: On May 15, the Communications and Digital Committee of the House of Lords of the UK Parliament published the UK Government’s response to the committee’s report, titled AI, Copyright, and the Creative Industries. The UK Government stated that “[o]ur approach to copyright must be driven by our shared principles and values and deliver what is best for the whole economy. This means protecting the UK’s position as a creative powerhouse while unlocking the extraordinary potential of AI-driven innovation to grow the economy and improve British lives.” The UK Government also noted that it no longer has a preferred option to introduce broad AI exceptions in UK copyright law, and detailed plans to launch a consultation on digital replicas in the summer, establish a taskforce on AI labeling, publish a review of mechanisms for creators to control use of their works online, and launch a working group on independent and small creative organizations to support their ability to license.

Japanese Government Advances Sound Recording Public Performance Royalties Bill: On May 15, the Japanese government passed a bill that would provide royalties for singers and musicians when their sound recordings are played in public places and venues. To address concerns arising from venue owners, the Agency for Cultural Affairs proposed a transition period of three years after the law’s passage in order to publicize the change and facilitate negotiations between the music industry and venue groups. Legislators are reportedly looking to pass the bill by the end of July.

European Commission Seeks Input on Gen AI’s Impact on EU Copyright Rules: On May 18, the European Commission launched a Call for Evidence seeking stakeholder input on whether the European Union’s 2019 Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market and related provisions of the EU AI Act adequately address generative artificial intelligence, online piracy of live events, performer and music-producer remuneration, and use of copyrighted works for scientific research. Under Article 30 of the Directive 2019/790/EC on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, the European Commission is due to review the Directive and present a report on the main findings. Comments are due to the Commission by midnight (Brussels time) on June 25.

Oral Arguments in ‘Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence’: On June 11 at 10 a.m., the Third Circuit Court of Appeals will hold oral arguments for the Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence case on June 11. More information is available on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals’ calendar and on the case list.

Deadline to File Comments for USCO NOI on Alternative Fee Structures: June 24 is the deadline to submit written comments in response to the notice of inquiry (NOI) to collect information regarding alternative fee structures that could be adopted once its updated electronic registration system is fully operational. The information will be used to study the feasibility of alternative fee structures, their impact on participation in the registration system, and the potential economic outcome.

Deadline to File Comments to EU Commission Call for Evidence on Copyright Directive: June 25 midnight (Brussels time), is the deadline to submit written comments in response to the European Commission’s Call for Evidence seeking stakeholder input on whether the European Union’s 2019 Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market and related provisions of the EU AI Act adequately address generative artificial intelligence, online piracy of live events, performer and music-producer remuneration, and use of copyrighted works for scientific research.

If you aren’t already a member of the Copyright Alliance, you can join today by completing our Individual Creator Members membership form! Members gain access to monthly newsletters, educational webinars, and so much more — all for free!

get blog updates