The Pulse
Four Entertainment Unions Challenge OpenAI’s Fair-Use Defense
SAG-AFTRA, the American Federation of Musicians and the Writers Guilds ask a New York federal court to let them support plaintiffs in the OpenAI copyright case. They argue that a blanket fair-use rule for AI training could weaken licensing
AI.info Team · Written with AI · fact-checked ·
Unions resist a blanket fair-use rule
OpenAI and Microsoft argue that training AI models on copyrighted works can be transformative; four entertainment unions want a federal judge to reject any categorical fair-use exemption. On October 29, SAG-AFTRA, the American Federation of Musicians and the Writers Guild of America East and West asked to support authors and news organizations in the consolidated copyright litigation against OpenAI. Their proposed friend-of-the-court brief says the unions’ experience negotiating AI terms can help the court assess the licensing markets at stake.
The unions say they represent more than 250,000 media and entertainment workers. They argue that a sweeping ruling in OpenAI’s favor could weaken the ability of creators and their representatives to negotiate compensation when copyrighted work is used to train commercial AI systems. The request concerns the parties’ competing motions for summary judgment, which ask the court to resolve some claims or defenses without a trial.
Licensing terms are part of the dispute
The unions point to provisions in SAG-AFTRA’s and the Writers Guilds’ 2026 agreements addressing licensing covered work for generative-AI training. Those terms, they argue, reflect negotiations over how work may be used and how licensing income can reach members through residuals, royalties and contributions to pension and health plans. Their filing asks the court to consider that experience when evaluating whether such licensing is a relevant market under copyright law.
In a statement published by SAG-AFTRA, the unions said: “Unauthorized appropriation of human-created works without consent, credit and compensation severely harms creative professionals, devalues their labor and undermines developing licensing markets.” The statement also says the unions want the court to reject a categorical fair-use exemption for AI training.
OpenAI and Microsoft argue training is transformative
OpenAI and Microsoft offer a different account of how model training uses copyrighted material. They argue that models learn statistical patterns rather than provide the original works as substitutes, and that training can be transformative. Authors and news publishers counter that copying works without permission can harm existing and potential markets, including licensing markets.
Fair use is evaluated under several statutory factors, including the purpose of the use and its effect on the market for the copyrighted work. The unions’ argument centers on that market question: they say negotiated licenses and compensation arrangements are evidence the court should consider, rather than treating AI training as automatically fair use. The case’s outcome could affect how courts weigh those claims, but the unions’ motion does not decide the copyright dispute.
The court must first allow the brief
The unions have asked for permission to file their brief; the request is not itself a ruling on the merits. Judge Sidney H. Stein’s order invited proposed amicus briefs tied to the summary-judgment motions and capped them at 6,000 words. After an extension, the deadline for those requests fell on October 30.
The case combines lawsuits by authors, news organizations and other copyright owners against OpenAI and Microsoft. The parties filed their competing summary-judgment motions in September, setting up a dispute over whether model training and related uses of copyrighted works qualify as fair use. The immediate question for the unions is whether the court will grant their request to add their perspective to that fight.