Entertainment Lawsuits in 2025: AI Copyright, Antitrust, and Diddy

Entertainment lawsuits in 2025 were defined less by a single blockbuster case than by a cluster of them, with artificial intelligence copyright fights, a jury verdict against Live Nation and Ticketmaster, the split criminal verdict in the Sean “Diddy” Combs trial, and a $1.5 billion settlement by Anthropic reshaping how music, film, and digital content are made, owned, and sold. The year’s rulings and deals pulled in every major studio, label, streaming platform, and AI developer, and several ran into early 2026 before concluding.

AI Copyright: Anthropic’s Record $1.5 Billion Settlement

The biggest financial outcome of the year came in Bartz v. Anthropic, a class action by authors who alleged the maker of the Claude chatbot had trained its models on millions of pirated books pulled from shadow libraries including Library Genesis and Pirate Library Mirror.

In June 2025, Senior U.S. District Judge William Alsup in the Northern District of California issued a split ruling. Training on legally purchased books was “exceedingly transformative” and qualified as fair use, but reliance on pirated copies crossed into infringement.¹ Rather than face a damages trial, Anthropic agreed in September 2025 to pay $1.5 billion, the largest AI copyright settlement and the largest copyright class action settlement on record.²

About 482,000 eligible works qualify for an estimated $3,100 payout each. Anthropic must destroy the original pirated dataset files, paid $300 million up front, and owes the balance in installments over two years. Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín held a final approval hearing in May 2026, by which point 93% of the class had submitted claims against only 350 opt-outs and 53 objections.² Because the case settled, it sets no binding precedent. The dollar figure did its own signaling work.³

Meta, Thomson Reuters, Midjourney, and The New York Times

Courts began sketching the legal boundaries of AI training on copyrighted work, and they did not all draw the same line.

In Kadrey v. Meta, Judge Chhabria granted summary judgment for Meta in June 2025. He went out of his way to say the ruling did not declare Meta’s training practices “lawful”; the plaintiffs had simply failed to build a sufficient factual record. He rejected the idea that transformativeness alone guarantees fair use and stressed the need to show market harm.⁴ Claims about whether Meta helped seed pirated books into torrent networks remain active.⁵

In Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence, decided in February 2025, Judge Stephanos Bibas in the District of Delaware went the other way. He found that Ross infringed Thomson Reuters’ copyrights by using Westlaw headnotes to train a legal research AI, and he rejected fair use as a matter of law. The use was commercial and non-transformative, and the effect on the potential market for AI training data weighed “decisively” for Thomson Reuters.⁶ The case is on appeal to the Third Circuit, with the WGA and SAG-AFTRA filing an amicus brief in November 2025 supporting Thomson Reuters.⁷

Hollywood opened its own front against generative AI in June 2025, when Disney, Universal, Lucasfilm, Marvel, DreamWorks Animation, and Twentieth Century Fox sued Midjourney in the Central District of California. The complaint alleges the text-to-image platform trained on studio-owned images and generates outputs substantially similar to characters and scenes from Star Wars, Despicable Me, and Shrek.⁸ Warner Bros., DC Comics, Hanna-Barbera, and Cartoon Network filed a separate complaint in September 2025, calling the infringement “systematic, ongoing, and willful.” The cases were consolidated in November 2025.⁹ Midjourney denied the allegations in August 2025, likening its training to human learning, and signaled fair use as its central defense.

The consolidated proceeding In Re: OpenAI, Inc., Copyright Infringement Litigation (25-md-3143, S.D.N.Y.) stands as the largest coordinated challenge to generative AI by news organizations and authors. In March 2025, Judge Sidney H. Stein partially denied OpenAI’s motion to dismiss, letting direct and contributory infringement claims proceed while cutting DMCA and unfair-competition claims.¹⁰ A Magistrate Judge then ordered OpenAI to produce 20 million de-identified ChatGPT conversation logs. OpenAI objected on privacy grounds, but Judge Stein affirmed in January 2026, finding the logs relevant to OpenAI’s fair use defense and the privacy safeguards adequate.¹¹ The Times seeks billions in actual and statutory damages.

Music Labels Pivot From Suing AI to Licensing It

The record industry started 2025 as a litigator against AI music generators and ended it as a licensor. In late October 2025, Universal Music Group settled its copyright infringement case against Udio. Warner Music Group settled with Udio the same week, then announced a separate settlement with Suno on December 2, 2025. Under the Suno deal, the startup dropped its fair use defense, agreed to an opt-in system requiring artist consent before training on their music, and committed to transition to licensed AI models. Suno also acquired the concert-discovery platform Songkick from Warner.¹² UMG and Sony Music Entertainment remained in active litigation against Suno as of December 2025, and Sony continued to pursue claims against both Suno and Udio.

Disney went further. In December 2025, it struck a three-year licensing agreement and $1 billion equity investment with OpenAI that lets the Sora video tool generate short social videos using more than 200 Disney, Marvel, Pixar, and Star Wars characters. The deal explicitly excludes talent likenesses or voices, routes fan-created videos through a curation process for Disney+, and gives Disney internal use of OpenAI APIs.¹³

Live Nation and Ticketmaster Found to Be an Illegal Monopoly

The Department of Justice and a coalition of state attorneys general sued Live Nation Entertainment and Ticketmaster in May 2024 in the Southern District of New York, alleging an illegal monopoly over live event ticketing and concert promotion.¹⁴ Trial began in early March 2026 before Judge Arun Subramanian. Five days in, the DOJ settled for $280 million in behavioral remedies over eight years, including termination of exclusive booking agreements at 13 amphitheaters, a 15% cap on service fees at company-owned venues, and required API access for third-party ticketing platforms.¹⁵

A coalition of 33 states and the District of Columbia rejected that settlement and pressed on. After a six-week trial and four days of deliberation, the jury on April 15, 2026, found Ticketmaster held an unlawful monopoly over live event ticketing and Live Nation held a national monopoly over large amphitheaters. Concertgoers were overcharged an average of $1.72 per ticket.¹⁴ The state coalition is seeking structural relief, including a court-ordered divestiture of Ticketmaster and a share of Live Nation amphitheaters.¹⁵ Live Nation moved for a new trial in May 2026. A second bench trial to determine final penalties is scheduled for early 2027.

The FTC opened a parallel front. In September 2025, the agency and seven states sued Live Nation and Ticketmaster for allegedly deceptive bait-and-switch pricing in which mandatory fees reaching 44% of ticket costs were hidden until checkout. The complaint also accused the companies of coordinating with ticket brokers and allowing them to bypass purchase limits, citing internal documents in which the company rejected identity verification tools because they were “too effective” and a senior executive admitted a policy of turning “a blind eye” to broker violations.¹⁶

The Supreme Court Throws Out a Billion-Dollar ISP Copyright Verdict

On March 25, 2026, a unanimous Supreme Court reversed the billion-dollar judgment against Cox Communications in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment. Sony and other major labels had sued the ISP in 2018 for refusing to cut off subscribers who were pirating music, and a jury awarded over $1 billion in statutory damages covering more than 10,000 songs.¹⁷

Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the Court, held that an ISP is contributorily liable only if it intended its service to be used for infringement, which requires either active inducement or a service “tailored to” infringement, meaning one incapable of substantial noninfringing use.¹⁸ Cox’s internet service has many lawful purposes, and Sony offered no evidence Cox marketed it to encourage piracy. The Court also clarified that DMCA safe-harbor provisions do not create affirmative liability for ISPs serving known infringers.¹⁷ Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, concurred in the outcome but criticized the majority’s “rigid two-part framework,” warning it could render DMCA safe-harbor provisions “effectively obsolete.”¹⁹

The Sean “Diddy” Combs Federal Trial

Sean “Diddy” Combs’s federal criminal trial in Manhattan ended on July 2, 2025, with a split verdict. After an eight-week trial before Judge Arun Subramanian, the jury acquitted Combs of racketeering conspiracy and two counts of sex trafficking, the most serious charges, which carried a 15-year mandatory minimum and up to life in prison.²⁰

The jury convicted him on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution under the federal Mann Act, in connection with former girlfriend Cassandra “Cassie” Ventura and a witness identified as “Jane.” Each count carries up to 10 years. Prosecutors alleged Combs used his industry power to coerce women into elaborately produced sexual performances, presenting security footage and electronic payment records as evidence. The defense called no witnesses and characterized the case as one of “love, jealousy, infidelity and money.”²¹ Judge Subramanian denied bail, citing a “propensity for violence.” Sentencing was scheduled for October 3, 2025, with defense estimates putting the guidelines near two years and prosecutors arguing for four to five.²⁰

Song and Master-Recording Disputes

Traditional music copyright litigation stayed busy. The infringement suit over Miley Cyrus’s 2023 hit “Flowers” survived a motion to dismiss in March 2025. The plaintiff, Tempo Music Investments, acquired catalog interests from Philip Lawrence, a co-writer of Bruno Mars’s “When I Was Your Man,” and alleges that “Flowers” copies it. Judge Dean D. Pregerson in the Central District of California confirmed a single co-owner of a copyright can sue for infringement without joining the others.²²

Drake’s defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us” was dismissed in August 2025, with the judge finding the lyrics were “inflammatory insults” characteristic of a rap battle rather than provable factual statements. Mariah Carey won an infringement case over “All I Want for Christmas Is You,” with the court finding only generic Christmas themes in common with the plaintiff’s 1989 track and ordering the plaintiff to pay Carey’s legal fees.²³

Salt-N-Pepa tried to reclaim their master recordings from UMG under Section 203 of the Copyright Act, which allows artists to terminate copyright transfers after 35 years. Judge Denise Cote in the Southern District of New York dismissed the case in January 2026. The 1986 recording agreements designated Noise In The Attic Productions as the sole owner, so the duo never held the copyrights and had no transfer to terminate.²⁴ They have said they plan to appeal.

Spotify’s Bundling Fight With Songwriters

The Mechanical Licensing Collective sued Spotify in May 2024, alleging the company slashed songwriter royalty payments by reclassifying Premium as a “bundle” after adding 15 hours of audiobook access. In January 2025, Judge Analisa Torres in the Southern District of New York dismissed the complaint, finding audiobook streaming “a product or service that is distinct from music streaming and has more than token value,” which made Premium a bundle under federal royalty-rate rules. That classification saves Spotify an estimated $150 million a year.²⁵

In September 2025, Judge Torres let the MLC file an amended complaint built on two new theories: that Spotify launched a separate “Audiobooks Access” plan with minimal marketing specifically to reduce the revenue attributed to music streaming, and that it improperly combined royalty reporting for that plan with its free tier. Spotify has disclosed that if the MLC prevails for the period from March 2024 through June 2025, additional royalties could reach roughly €256 million (about $290 million), plus penalties and interest.²⁶

New Deepfake Laws and Union AI Protections

President Trump signed the TAKE IT DOWN Act into law on May 19, 2025. The law, which passed the House 409-2 and the Senate unanimously, criminalizes the knowing publication of non-consensual intimate visual depictions, whether real or AI-generated. Penalties reach two years in prison for content depicting adults and three for minors. Covered platforms must implement notice-and-takedown procedures by May 2026, with 48 hours to remove reported material. The FTC enforces the platform rules.²⁷²⁸

The broader NO FAKES Act (H.R. 2794) was reintroduced in 2025. It would establish a federal right protecting voice and visual likeness against unauthorized digital replicas and give artists a private right of action. It had not passed as of late 2025.²⁹ California’s laws, effective January 1, 2025, bar contracts authorizing digital replicas without specific safeguards and close a loophole that previously allowed use of deceased celebrities’ likenesses in entertainment without heir consent. New York passed legislation in June 2025 requiring advertisements featuring AI-generated “synthetic performers” to carry a conspicuous disclosure.¹²

The unions translated 2023 strike leverage into contract language. SAG-AFTRA ratified a four-year deal requiring producers to show “significant additional value” before replacing a live actor or existing digital avatar with an AI performer, with arbitration and notice-and-bargaining rights if synthetic actor use scales. The union cannot strike over AI issues until 2030. The Writers Guild ratified its own four-year deal in April 2026, requiring studios to notify the guild when they license writers’ work for AI training and to hold ongoing consultation meetings, though it does not require payment for scripts used in training.³⁰

Other Notable Matters

Disney agreed to a $43.25 million settlement in Rasmussen v. The Walt Disney Company, a class action alleging systematic underpayment of female employees compared to male counterparts in similar roles. Final approval came in September 2025. The deal also requires Disney to retain an outside consultant and a labor economist to conduct annual pay equity analyses for three years.³¹

Author Neil Gaiman was sued in February 2025 by Scarlett Pavlovich, a former nanny, in Wisconsin, New York, and Massachusetts, alleging sexual assault and human trafficking. Gaiman denied all allegations and called the encounters consensual. All three U.S. lawsuits were dismissed between June 2025 and February 2026 on the grounds that the case belongs in New Zealand, where the alleged events took place.³² Adaptations of his works across Amazon, Netflix, Disney, and Dark Horse Comics were paused or canceled.³³

Urban One agreed to a $675,000 settlement to resolve a class action over a March 2025 data breach exposing personal information of approximately 13,778 people. Class members can claim up to $10,000 in documented losses or an alternative cash payment of up to $500, plus three years of credit monitoring. The claim deadline is August 31, 2026.³⁴

1
NPR. Anthropic Settlement Authors Copyright AI
2
Courthouse News Service. Authors, Publishers Near Final Approval of $1.5 Billion Anthropic Copyright Settlement
3
Axios. Anthropic AI Copyright Settlement
4
Munck Wilson Mandala. AI and Copyright in the Entertainment Industry: Where 2025 Leaves Us
5
Norton Rose Fulbright. AI in Litigation Series: An Update on AI Copyright Cases in 2026
6
Authors Alliance. Thomson Reuters v. Ross: The First AI Fair Use Ruling
7
WGA West. Artificial Intelligence
8
ForensisGroup. Disney and Universal v. Midjourney: U.S. Generative AI Copyright Litigation
9
IPWatchdog. Warner Bros. Complaint Alleges Midjourney’s Copyright Infringement Systematic, Willful
10
AI Lawsuit Tracker. The New York Times Company v. OpenAI, Inc.
11
U.S. District Court, S.D.N.Y. In Re: OpenAI, Inc., Copyright Infringement Litigation, Order
12
Kaufman Borgeest & Ryan. AI and the Entertainment Industry
13
The Walt Disney Company. Disney-OpenAI Sora Agreement
14
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. State Coalition Claims Victory in Live Nation Monopolization Trial
15
Courthouse News Service. After Winning Antitrust Case, States Ask Court to Split Up Live Nation and Ticketmaster
16
Federal Trade Commission. FTC Sues Live Nation-Ticketmaster for Engaging in Illegal Ticket Resale Tactics, Deceiving Artists and Consumers
17
SCOTUSblog. Court Rejects Billion-Dollar Judgment for Copyright Infringement by Internet Service Provider
18
U.S. Supreme Court. Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment, No. 24-171
19
Quarles & Brady. Supreme Court Reverses Billion-Dollar Copyright Verdict
20
PBS NewsHour. Sean Diddy Combs Acquitted of Most Serious Trafficking and Racketeering Charges
21
Court TV. US v. Sean Combs – Diddy Sex Trafficking Trial
22
Variety. Miley Cyrus Denied Dismissal of Copyright Lawsuit Over Flowers
23
Billboard. Biggest Music Law Stories 2025
24
Music Business Worldwide. Salt-N-Pepa Lawsuit Against UMG Over Ownership of Master Recordings Dismissed
25
Variety. Spotify Wins Lawsuit Over Bundling Royalties
26
Music Business Worldwide. MLC Can File Amended Complaint in Bundling Lawsuit Against Spotify, Court Says
27
StackCyber. AI Deepfake Laws
28
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. Take It Down Act
29
KR Law. Top 5 Music Law Moments of 2025
30
Red Shark News. SAG-AFTRA AI Deal: Synthetic Actors 2026
31
Cohen Milstein. Rasmussen et al. v. The Walt Disney Company et al.
32
The Guardian. US Judges Lawsuits Neil Gaiman
33
Variety. Neil Gaiman Speaks on Sexual Misconduct Allegations a Year Later
34
ClassAction.org. $675K Urban One Settlement Resolves Class Action Lawsuit Over 2025 Data Breach