Legal Cases · AI Litigation Tracker
Every AI case, as it’s filed.
Lawsuits and regulator investigations involving AI, tracked from the docket across 145+ jurisdictions, summarised in plain English and verified by a legal professional before they reach your dashboard.
570
AI-related litigation cases tracked across jurisdictions
145+
Jurisdictions monitored
16
Fields on every case
Human-verified
On your dashboard
The newest cases, the day they land.
The Newest Cases panel is the first thing you see each morning: every new AI case, newest first, with the court, the filing date and who checked it.
- Sort by filing date, or by when we added it
- Courts and regulators side by side, from New York to Warsaw
- The initials of the person who verified each entry, on every row
By File DateRecently Added
RecordDate filedHuman-verified by
USA Today v. OpenAI New
United States District Court Southern District of New York
Oct 8, 2026
RG
Padilla v. SpaceXAI LLC et al.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Oct 6, 2026
RG
CV278 — Italian Competition Authority investigation into Suno
Italian Competition Authority
Oct 5, 2026
RG
Polish Investigation into Google
Poland Office of Competition and Consumer Protection
Oct 4, 2026
RG
Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology (LASST) v. OpenAI
In the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco
Sep 28, 2026
RG
Zhejiang Dingli Machinery Co., Ltd. v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
Sep 21, 2026
RG
His Majesty the King in Right of the Province of British Columbia et al v. Altman et al
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Sep 20, 2026
BB
UMG Recordings, Inc. et al v. Suno, Inc. et al.
U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Sep 17, 2026
BB
From the live dashboard, October 2026.
The case grid
Every case in one grid.
Filter by anything.
Search across every column at once: party, court, issue, judge or outcome. Open any row for the full record, written up in plain English and checked against the source. Try it with five real records below.
Legal Cases
Try:
Showing 5 of 5 sample cases
| Case name | Jurisdiction | Date filed | Type | Case status | Active | Copyright | Class action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| USA Today v. OpenAI | U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York | 2026-10-08 | Civil Litigation | Active | |||
| Stephen Thaler v. Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights, et al. | U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit | 2025-07-17 | Civil Litigation | Dismissed | |||
| Gebala v. OpenAI Foundation | Supreme Court of British Columbia | 2026-03-09 | Civil Litigation | Consolidated | |||
| Italian DPA investigation into OpenAI’s Sora | Garante, Italy | 2024-03-08 | National Enforcement | Active | |||
| CMA Review of AI Foundation Models | Competition and Markets Authority, United Kingdom | 2023-05-04 | National Enforcement | Active |
No sample case matches that. On the platform, the same search runs across every record.
USA Today v. OpenAI
United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Civil LitigationActiveCopyright✓ Verified · RG
Date filed
8 October 2026
Plaintiffs
USA Today Co., Inc.; Gannett Satellite Information Network, LLC; Gannett GP Media, Inc.; The Courier-Journal, Inc.; Des Moines Register and Tribune Company; Detroit Free Press, Inc. and eight further publishers
Defendants
OpenAI Foundation; OpenAI GP, LLC; OAI International, Inc.; OpenAI OpCo, LLC; OpenAI Global, LLC; OAI Corporation; and OpenAI Group PBC
Main issue
Whether OpenAI’s alleged unauthorized use of plaintiffs’ copyrighted news articles and journalistic content to train or operate its artificial intelligence models constitutes copyright infringement.
Summary of allegations
The USA TODAY Plaintiffs allege that OpenAI unlawfully scraped and copied copyrighted content from 19 of their publications to train its generative-AI models without authorization, including by removing copyright-management information. They further allege that OpenAI’s models memorized and reproduced their articles in ChatGPT outputs, causing economic harm by creating substitutive products that divert readers, subscribers, and licensing opportunities from the plaintiffs’ publications.
Status / outcome
The case was filed on October 8, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, so there is currently no judicial outcome. The complaint asserts copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement, and violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act based on the alleged removal of copyright-management information, and seeks more than $250 million in damages as well as injunctive relief.
Potential / expected impact
If the plaintiffs prevail, the case could have significant implications for the use of copyrighted news content to train and operate GenAI systems, particularly because the complaint challenges both the training of models and the reproduction of copyrighted material in AI outputs. The plaintiffs also seek an order requiring destruction of GPT models and training sets incorporating their content, which, if granted, could have substantial consequences for how AI companies collect training data and develop safeguards around copyrighted works.
Stephen Thaler v. Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights, et al.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Civil LitigationDismissedCopyright✓ Verified
Date filed
17 July 2025
Judge
Beryl A. Howell (Presiding)
Plaintiff
Stephen Thaler
Main issues
Copyrightability of AI-Generated Works; Human Authorship Requirement under the Copyright Act; Administrative Procedure Act (APA) Review of Copyright Registration Denial
Summary of allegations
The petitioner, Stephen Thaler, challenged the U.S. Copyright Office’s refusal to register a copyright for a visual art piece titled “A Recent Entrance to Paradise,” which was autonomously generated by his AI system…
Status / outcome
On March 3, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States officially declined to grant Stephen Thaler’s petition for a writ of certiorari…
Gebala v. OpenAI Foundation
In the Supreme Court of British Columbia
Civil LitigationConsolidated✓ Verified
Date filed
9 March 2026
Main issues
Negligence; Strict Products Liability
Defendants
OpenAI Foundation and associated entities, including OpenAI Group PBC, OpenAI GP, LLC, OpenAI OpCo, LLC and OpenAI Holdings, LLC
Summary of allegations
The lawsuit, initially filed in Canada by Maya Gebala and her family, has been refiled in the Northern District of California, joining other victims’ families…
Italian DPA investigation into OpenAI’s Sora
Garante per la protezione dei dati personali, Italy
National EnforcementActive✓ Verified
Date opened
8 March 2024
Main issues
GDPR compliance regarding AI model training; lawfulness and legal basis for processing personal data; transparency to users and non-users; data collection and sourcing practices
Summary
The Italian Data Protection Authority (DPA) has initiated an investigation into OpenAI’s Sora text-to-video model…
Potential / expected impact
This investigation signals increased scrutiny by EU regulators on the data-sourcing practices for training generative AI models. It could force AI developers like OpenAI to be more transparent about their training data and establish a clear legal basis for processing personal data under GDPR…
CMA Review of AI Foundation Models
Competition and Markets Authority, United Kingdom
National EnforcementActive✓ Verified
Date opened
4 May 2023
Main issues
Market competition risks in AI foundation models; consumer protection risks; principles for fair, open and effective competition; market power and vertical integration in AI ecosystems
Status / outcome
On March 9, 2026, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published new guidance on agentic AI and consumers as part of its ongoing monitoring of the AI ecosystem…
Potential / expected impact
The CMA’s review aims to establish guiding principles for the AI foundation model market to ensure fair competition and consumer protection…
Records shown as they stood on the platform in October 2026. Every case carries 16 fields: parties, court, judges, counsel, issues, allegations, status and expected impact.
Watchlists & alerts
Follow a case.
Know when it moves.
Star the cases that touch your clients or your vendors. When a ruling lands, a filing is amended or a status changes, it rises to the top of your watchlist, already summarised and already checked.
The difference
AI finds the case.
A legal mind checks it.
No case reaches your dashboard on the model’s word alone. A paralegal checks the parties, court, dates and status against the filing itself. A qualified lawyer reads the summary, corrects it where it over-reaches and signs it off.
Only then is it published, with the verifier’s initials on the record.
Verification slip
Live
United States · S.D.N.Y. · Filed 8 Oct 2026
USA Today v. OpenAI
GatheredIntelligence gathered by Thelonious®AI-powered
ReviewedChecked & authorised by the listed verifiersHuman-verified
StatusPublished to your deskVerified
What’s covered
Not just the headline lawsuits. The whole docket.
Private litigation and regulator action sit in the same grid, so you see the full pressure on a company or a technology, not one court’s view of it.
Copyright and training data
News publishers, record labels and artists against model developers.
Regulator investigations
Competition and data-protection authorities opening cases on AI.
Product liability and negligence
Claims that an AI system caused harm, and who answers for it.
Class actions
Flagged on every record, so you can filter to them in one click.
AI authorship
Whether AI-generated work can be protected at all.
Trade and supply chain
Disputes reaching courts such as the US Court of International Trade.
S.D. New YorkN.D. CaliforniaN.D. IllinoisD. MassachusettsD.C. CircuitCalifornia Superior CourtUS Court of International TradeSupreme Court of British ColumbiaUK CMAItalian GaranteItalian Competition AuthorityPoland UOKiK
Who uses it
Two desks. One record.
For in-house teams
Know when your AI vendors end up in court.
- Watch every case naming the models and suppliers you use
- Pair it with the AI Tech Stack Audit to see the litigation behind each vendor
- Brief the board on a ruling without waiting for an outside counsel memo
For law firms
Write the client alert before the market does.
- Start from a checked summary with the parties, court and status already set out
- See related cases across jurisdictions before you advise
- Ask Thelonious Research the follow-up question, answered from the verified record
See every case touching your AI.
Tell us the vendors, models or clients you care about. We’ll show you the docket on a short call, or send a one-page Snapshot first.