MOC

Court Rulings

Updated 2 May 2025
moclegalcourt-rulingscase-law

Court Rulings

Legislation says what the rules are. Court rulings show what they mean.

AI law is being written right now — not just by legislators but by judges interpreting existing law in the context of technology that didn’t exist when the law was written. Every ruling here establishes precedent that shapes what comes next.

This section tracks the landmark cases. What was decided, why it matters, and how it connects to the rest of the AI landscape.

By Topic

Copyright & Training Data

The biggest legal battleground in AI. Who owns what when a model is trained on copyrighted work?

  • NYT v OpenAI — The New York Times sues OpenAI for training on its articles. The case that could define the economics of AI.
  • Getty v Stability AI — Getty Images sues Stability AI over image generation trained on its library. UK copyright test case.
  • Thaler v Perlmutter — Can AI be an inventor or author? US court says no.

Surveillance & Privacy

Deepfakes & Synthetic Content

Cases emerging. This area is accelerating as courts encounter AI-generated evidence, non-consensual deepfakes, and synthetic media in defamation cases.

Liability & Negligence

Who’s liable when AI causes harm? Cases are beginning to test this across healthcare, autonomous vehicles, and financial advice.

By Jurisdiction

EU 🇪🇺

USA 🇺🇸

UK 🇬🇧

Why These Cases Matter

Three reasons to track court rulings, even if you’re not a lawyer:

1. They create the real rules. The EU AI Act says “high-risk AI requires conformity assessment.” Court rulings will define what “high-risk” means in practice.

2. They set the boundaries for business. Can you train on copyrighted data? The answer to NYT v OpenAI determines the economics of every AI company.

3. They reveal what society actually cares about. When courts prioritise privacy over innovation (Clearview AI), or authorship over efficiency (Thaler), they’re telling us what values win when they conflict.

Go Deeper

Sources

enes