Innovation or Plagiarism? OpenAI v GEMA: Does Big Tech Try to Evade Copyright Law?
Introduction
In a recent lawsuit between OpenAI and music rights activist society GEMA, a court in Munich ruled that ChatGPT had violated German Copyright laws by pasting lyrics from famous songs to train its AI. [1] Some of the famous German hits were used such as Herbert Grönemeyer’s Men. [1] The lawsuit was brought by GEMA – a society advocating for the rights of original artists and composers. [2]
The society had filed the lawsuit in November 2024, arguing that ChatGPT has been using copyrighted content but other internet services seek licensing before using such content. [3] They also provided demonstrations how ChatGPT replicates lyrics from famous artists through their responses. [3] OpenAI instead argued AI reflected what was inputted by the user, however, the court still found that memorising lyrics and the reproduction of lyrics was a copyright infringement. [2]
IP Violations: Content Used to Train ChatGPT
First, ChatGPT did not have permission to use the content to train AI, which created a chain of copyright infringements. [4] ChatGPT trains off of input from the user or from online sources, theoretically, even if ChatGPT creates a new work, it is training from original work on the internet and the original owner always has the exclusive right, thus they can claim the copyright infringement. [4]
OpenAI may argue their terms of service state that the rights, title and interest belong to the user, it raises questions on how they can distribute these rightswhen their sources are not approved in and they have not gained permission from the original owner of their sources. [5] Ironically, ChatGPT claims that users should follow the jurisdiction of their countries (In the UK’s case: never use AI’s data for profit, but this was never enforced in reality.) [6] Thus, users in the UK can use copyrighted work for profit, which continues the damaging chain of copyright infringements due to AI replicating original artists’ work and input.
Circumvention of IP Violations
Companies have tried to fight the boundaries by arguing fair use. In the US, tech companies have fought for using fair use in the act, it permits them to avoid costly copyright fees and the hassle of contacting the copyrights holder. [7] Companies have argued it is a matter of national security or innovation, specifically, OpenAI took the approach to argue that their AI is a matter of national security and should be able to pass the fair use exception. [7]
However, this mishandles the purpose of fair use and what is considered research instead of stealing work. In a recent US case compiling 12 complaints against OpenAI and Microsoft, the court rejected OpenAI’s attempts to dismiss the claims that summaries given by ChatGPT violates copyright. [8] Specifically, Catriona MacLeod Stevenson, general counsel and deputy CEO of the PA, has told the Book Seller that OpenAI can write the next volume of George RR Martin’s original series, which further eradicates publishers’ efforts in distributing original works. [8] Thus, companies like Google, OpenAI and Microsoft are actively misusing fair use to blur the lines between AI using sources as innovation and stealing work.
Conclusion
The decision paves the way for Courts to regulate the work of artists. It remains unsure if tech companies will continue to circumvent the law to avoid costs, blurring the boundaries between violating intellectual property and considering AI training off sources as a way of innovation. Therefore, this remains a major concern as the law catches up with the AI’s development.
Bibliography
[1] Deborah Cole, Philip Oltermann, ‘ChatGPT violated copyright law by ‘learning’ from song lyrics, German court rules’ (The Guardian, 11 Nov 2025) <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/nov/11/chatgpt-violated-copyright-laws-german-court-rules> accessed 14 Nov 2025
[2] Jörn Poltz, Friederike Heine, ‘OpenAI used song lyrics in violation of copyright laws, German court says’ (Reuters, 11 Nov 2025) < https://www.reuters.com/world/german-court-sides-with-plaintiff-copyright-case-against-openai-2025-11-11/> accessed 14 Nov 2025
[3] Murray Stassen, ‘GEMA WINS LANDMARK RULING AGAINST OPENAI OVER CHATGPT’S USE OF SONG LYRICS’ (MusicBusiness Worldwide, 11 Nov 2025) <https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/gema-wins-landmark-ruling-against-openai-over-chatgpts-use-of-song-lyrics/> accessed 14 Nov 2025
[4] Mike Papakonstantinou, Ella Morgen, ‘IP Concerns with ChatGPT’ (Center for Legal & Court Technology, 21 Nov 2024) < https://www.legaltechcenter.net/2024/11/21/ip-concerns-with-chatgpt/> accessed 14 Nov 2025
[5] Bianca Lindau, ‘ChatGPT: Who Owns the Content Generated?’ (Caldwell, 6 Apr 2023) <https://caldwelllaw.com/news/chatgpt-who-owns-the-content-generated/> accessed 14 Nov 2025
[6] Sarah Chudleigh, ‘Are there any legal or copyright concerns when using ChatGPT-generated content?’ (botpress, 12 Jul 2024) < https://www.botpress.com/blog/are-there-any-legal-or-copyright-concerns-when-using-chatgpt-generated-content> accessed 14 Nov 2025
[7] Katelyn Chedraoui, ‘AI Has Sent Copyright Laws Into Chaos. What You Need to Know About Your Rights Online’ (CNET, 11 Nov 2025) < https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/ai-has-sent-copyright-laws-into-chaos-what-you-need-to-know-about-your-rights-online/> accessed 14 Nov 2025
[8] Matilda Battersby, ‘OpenAI copyright case reveals 'ease with which generative AI can devastate the market', says PA’ (The Bookseller, 12 Nov 2025) < https://www.thebookseller.com/news/openai-copyright-case-reveals-ease-with-which-generative-ai-can-devastate-the-market-says-pa> accessed 14 Nov 2025
Image Credits: Emiliano Vittoriosi on Unspalsh
