Vai al contenuto

Cookie di analisi

Usiamo Google Analytics e Google Tag Manager per contare le visite e capire quali pagine sono utili. Se accetti, Google Analytics può impostare cookie per riconoscere le tue visite successive. Se rifiuti, non imposta alcun cookie, ma Google riceve comunque un segnale senza cookie per ogni pagina che visiti. Non inviamo a Google il tuo nome, il tuo indirizzo e-mail né i dati della tua registrazione, e puoi cambiare la tua scelta in qualsiasi momento da «Impostazioni cookie» in fondo alla pagina. Privacy

Questa traduzione dell'interfaccia è una bozza e non è stata rivista da una persona madrelingua. L'inglese è la versione di riferimento. English

AI Lawsuit Tracker counts 248 cases against 76 companies; copyright dominates

11 ott 2026 · Raccolto automaticamente da fonti pubbliche. Non revisionato da una persona.

Questo contenuto è disponibile solo nella lingua originale (inglese).

What happened

An updated public database surfaced on October 11, 2026 now tracks 248 AI-related lawsuits against 76 companies across 14 jurisdictions, updated through October 8. Copyright dominates with 145 cases — well over half the total — and 69 cases are flagged as class actions; other categories include chatbot harm, privacy and biometrics, deepfakes and likeness, and antitrust. The most-sued companies are OpenAI (55 cases), Google (25), Meta (21), Microsoft (21) and Anthropic (18); 134 cases are active while only 25 are decided and 18 settled. The overview highlights the US Third Circuit's September 29 affirmance in Thomson Reuters v. Ross — described as the first federal appellate decision on fair use in AI training — while noting it involved a non-generative system and does not decide the pending generative-AI cases.

Why it may matter to you

It is a single, current index of the whole AI-copyright litigation landscape: who is being sued most, where cases stand, and how few have reached final decisions. The Third Circuit's Ross affirmance is the closest thing to appellate guidance on AI-training fair use, even though its limits mean generative-AI cases remain undecided.

What is not yet known

The authors caution that the tracker is anonymous and unaudited and should be used as an index to dockets rather than a legal source. Individual case counts and statuses should be verified against court records.

Fonti