A coalition of Hollywood artists and organisations has filed a brief in the New York Times copyright case, arguing that creative works used to train AI can be licensed through existing collective systems. The filing challenges OpenAI and Microsoft’s claim that licensing training material is impractical, putting a concrete alternative on the table in a consequential fight over AI and copyright.
OpenAI Watch analysis
What happened
The 31-page amicus brief was filed in the Southern District of New York on Friday, according to TheWrap’s report. The coalition includes the Human Consent Foundation, CAA, the Music Artists Coalition, the National Association of Voice Actors and Creators Coalition on AI. Cate Blanchett is among the prominent supporters named in the report.
The brief argues that creative industries already use collective licensing systems to clear rights across large repertoires, and says those systems could address the transaction costs that AI companies cite. It is an argument submitted to the court, not a ruling on whether AI training is lawful. TheWrap said OpenAI and Microsoft had not immediately responded to its request for comment.
Why it matters
This filing makes the copyright debate less abstract: the coalition says existing licensing infrastructure could let AI companies pay for access without negotiating separately with every creator. Whether those systems can work at the scale and speed AI developers need is now part of the argument before the court.
The brief is a separate intervention in the same case as Wikimedia’s recent filing, but it brings a different constituency and a specific proposal from creative industries. One side says licensing at scale is workable; the other has argued that it is not. The court has a practical question to consider, even if the answer will not settle every dispute over training data.
Our read
The coalition’s proposal deserves attention because it is more than a demand to say no: it points to collective licensing as a possible route between blanket permission and a negotiation for every work. That does not prove the system would fit AI training, and a court filing is not a verdict. But if licensing is said to be impossible, existing rights-clearing systems are relevant evidence to test that claim.
What to watch
- How OpenAI and Microsoft respond to the coalition’s licensing argument.
- Whether the court’s handling of the brief changes the issues under consideration.
- Whether the coalition or its members provide further detail on how licensing would work for AI training.
Discussion spark: Should AI companies have to use collective licences for training data if existing creative-industry systems can clear rights at scale, or would that still leave creators without meaningful control?
Sources and evidence
- Cate Blanchett-Led Coalition Challenges OpenAI in New York Times Copyright Battle – TheWrap (31 October 2026, 03:35 UTC)
OpenAI Watch is independently operated by WittyWires. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by OpenAI.