SAG‑AFTRA, WGA & AFM Ask Judge to Block Fair‑Use Exemption for AI Training, Citing ‘Harms of Unlicensed Use’

Summary

The Screen Actors Guild‑American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG‑AFTRA), the Writers Guild of America (WGA) and the American Federation of Musicians (AFM) have filed a joint amicus brief in the New York federal court case that pits OpenAI against a coalition of news outlets and high‑profile writers. The brief urges the judge to reject a categorical fair‑use exemption that would allow OpenAI to train its large‑language models on copyrighted material without a license.

Key Points from the Amicus Brief

• Unlicensed training harms creators – The unions argue that using news articles, scripts, songs and other works without permission transfers “potentially enormous value” from middle‑ and working‑class creators to a trillion‑dollar corporation.
• Fair use must stay case‑by‑case – Rather than a blanket exemption, the brief insists that each instance of AI training be evaluated under traditional copyright analysis.
• Negotiated licensing rights at stake – Recent 2026 collective‑bargaining agreements gave unions a “notice‑and‑bargaining” right for third‑party licenses of covered works used in commercial generative‑AI systems. A broad fair‑use ruling would render those provisions moot.
• Court’s role – The brief frames the dispute as “no more than an ordinary copyright case,” urging the court to apply existing law rather than create a new AI‑specific exception.

Context of the Litigation

• Plaintiffs: The New York Times, several regional newspapers (Florida, Arkansas), The Intercept, and a roster of celebrated authors (e.g., Ta‑Nehisi Coates, George R.R. Martin, Jodi Picoult) have sued OpenAI for alleged copyright infringement.
• Defendant: OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT and other generative‑AI tools, contends that its training practices fall under fair use.
• Unions’ stance: SAG‑AFTRA, WGA and AFM have long opposed unrestricted AI training. Their 2023 strike demands included language to secure licensing for AI use of members’ work, a demand that re‑emerged in 2026 negotiations.

Practical Implications

• For creators: If the court denies the exemption, AI developers would need to secure licenses for any copyrighted material used in training, potentially creating a new revenue stream for writers, actors and musicians.
• For AI firms: A loss could increase compliance costs and slow model development, prompting companies to explore alternative data sources or negotiate industry‑wide licensing frameworks.
• How to verify: The 34‑page brief is publicly available at the court docket (gov.uscourts.nysd_.640396.2332.1.pdf). Interested parties can review the filing and monitor subsequent motions and oral arguments in the New York Southern District Court.

Outlook

The case remains unresolved, and the judge’s decision on the fair‑use exemption will likely shape the future balance between AI innovation and creators’ rights. Both sides have signaled readiness for further appeals, suggesting the dispute could continue for months.

--- Keywords: fair use exemption, AI training, copyright infringement, OpenAI, SAG‑AFTRA, WGA, AFM, licensing, creators’ rights, generative AI, court brief