GEMA, the German music collecting society, sued OpenAI in the Munich Regional Court I, alleging that ChatGPT memorized and reproduced German song lyrics without a license. On November 11, 2025, the court largely ruled for GEMA, granting injunctions, disclosure, and a declaration of liability for damages. OpenAI’s appeal is pending before the Munich Higher Regional Court, and on July 31, 2026, the Regional Court ruled against Suno in a related case.
Latest development Jul 31, 2026
On July 31, 2026, the Munich Regional Court I ruled against Suno in the related case GEMA v. Suno (42 O 763/25). It held that Suno’s U.S. training, German memorization, and outputs of six works infringed copyright, applying U.S. law to the training and rejecting fair use. OpenAI’s appeal of the November 2025 judgment remains pending before the Munich Higher Regional Court.
Why it matters
The appeal will test whether memorizing and reproducing copyrighted works in a large language model infringes copyright, and whether the EU text and data mining exception covers that use. The outcome affects AI developers that train models outside Europe and rights holders across the EU.
Background
GEMA (Gesellschaft für musikalische Aufführungs- und mechanische Vervielfältigungsrechte) is the German collecting society for musical performance and reproduction rights. In November 2024, it sued OpenAI, L.L.C., and OpenAI Ireland Ltd before the Munich Regional Court I (Landgericht München I). GEMA alleged that OpenAI trained the GPT-4 and GPT-4o large language models underlying ChatGPT on the lyrics of nine well-known German songs without a license. The songs include “Atemlos” by Kristina Bach and “Männer” by Herbert Grönemeyer. GEMA also alleged that ChatGPT reproduced those lyrics almost verbatim in response to simple prompts.
GEMA argued that this amounted to unauthorized reproduction, communication to the public, and adaptation under the German Copyright Act (Urheberrechtsgesetz, UrhG). OpenAI argued that its models store only statistical correlations and that any output resulted from user prompts. It also argued that the EU text and data mining exceptions in Sections 44b and 60d UrhG applied in any event.
On November 11, 2025, the court’s 42nd Civil Chamber, presided over by Judge Elke Schwager, largely ruled for GEMA. It held that memorizing lyrics in model parameters and reproducing them in outputs infringe copyright, and that the text and data mining exceptions do not apply. It granted injunctive relief, disclosure of training and revenue information, and a declaration that OpenAI is liable in damages. The court dismissed a secondary claim alleging violation of the lyricists’ moral rights. Both parties had asked the chamber to refer questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), but the court declined.
On December 8, 2025, OpenAI appealed to the Munich Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht München) (case no. 6 U 3662/25 e), so the judgment is not yet final. In a related case, GEMA v. Suno, GEMA sued the U.S. AI music generator Suno in the same court in January 2025. On July 31, 2026, the same chamber held that Suno’s training in the United States, memorization in Germany, and outputs of six musical works infringed copyright. It applied U.S. copyright law to the training conduct and rejected a fair use defense. As of September 2026, OpenAI’s appeal remains pending, and no date has been set for a hearing on the merits.
Timeline 7 events
-
JudgmentMunich court rules against Suno on AI music generation
The Landgericht München I found Suno liable for training in the United States, memorization in Germany, and infringing outputs of six musical works. It applied U.S. copyright law to the training and rejected fair use.
GEMA notches a second transatlantic AI copyright win in GermanySuno loses GEMA case as Munich court sets 250,000 euro penalty per breach
-
HearingMunich court hears oral argument in GEMA v. Suno
The same 42nd Civil Chamber heard argument in the related case against AI music generator Suno.
-
AppealOpenAI appeals to Munich Higher Regional Court
OpenAI lodged an appeal (case no. 6 U 3662/25 e) against the November 2025 judgment, meaning the ruling is not yet final.
-
JudgmentMunich court rules OpenAI liable for copyright infringement
The Landgericht München I held that memorization of lyrics in ChatGPT’s parameters and their reproduction in outputs infringe copyright. It rejected the text and data mining defense and granted injunctive relief, disclosure, and a damages declaration.
Landmark ruling of the Munich Regional Court (GEMA v OpenAI) on copyright and AI trainingOpenAI chatbots cannot use song lyrics without paying, German court rules
-
HearingMunich court hears oral argument in GEMA v. OpenAI
The 42nd Civil Chamber of the Landgericht München I held the oral hearing.
-
FilingGEMA files related suit against Suno
GEMA filed a separate action at the Landgericht München I against U.S. AI music generator Suno, seeking an injunction, disclosure and damages over six musical works.
GEMA v Suno: Munich court finds AI music training and outputs infringe copyright
-
FilingGEMA files suit against OpenAI in Munich
GEMA sued OpenAI, L.L.C. and OpenAI Ireland Ltd before the Landgericht München I, alleging unlicensed use of nine German song lyrics to train and operate ChatGPT.
Experimental AI forecast
How it is madeHow will the Munich Higher Regional Court resolve OpenAI’s appeal of the November 11, 2025 GEMA judgment by June 30, 2028?
- Appeal court upholds GEMA’s win33%
- Still pending on June 30, 202828%
- Appeal court partly upholds GEMA’s win15%
- GEMA and OpenAI settle or license15%
- OpenAI’s appeal succeeds9%
- Resolves by
- Jun 30, 2028in 21 months
- Record confidence
- Low
The most likely result is that the Munich Higher Regional Court upholds GEMA’s win against OpenAI, at 33%, by June 30, 2028. German appeal courts usually affirm first-instance judgments, and the same chamber has since reached consistent findings against Suno. A stay or CJEU referral that leaves the appeal pending is the main alternative, at 28%.
How it resolves. Resolves on the first qualifying event in case 6 U 3662/25 e reported in public court records, press releases, or reliable media by June 30, 2028. “Upholds” means the Higher Regional Court affirms the finding that memorization and output infringe, with injunction and damages liability substantially intact. “Partly” means it affirms infringement on some grounds but reverses or narrows others, such as memorization liability or the text and data mining ruling. “Reverses” means it sets aside the infringement findings or remands without affirming liability. “Settles” means a publicly reported settlement, license, or withdrawal of the appeal or claim. “Still pending” covers no appellate judgment, including a stay or a CJEU referral.
Reasoning
Starting point. German Higher Regional Court civil appeals, especially complex copyright appeals on novel EU law questions: Roughly 20% to 25% of German civil appeals succeed at least in part. Many others end by withdrawal or settlement. Complex IP appeals often take 12 to 24 months.
German civil appeals affirm in most cases, with roughly a fifth to a quarter changing the result at least in part. The Regional Court gave detailed reasons, and its July 31, 2026 Suno judgment applied the same reasoning, so the first-instance position looks consistent. But the core questions are novel and unsettled. They include whether model parameters hold reproductions and whether the text and data mining exceptions apply. That raises the chance of a partial reversal or a narrowed judgment. Both parties asked for a CJEU referral at first instance. Similar AI copyright questions are reaching the CJEU, so a stay or referral could keep the appeal open well past 2028. No hearing date was set as of September 2026, nine and a half months after the appeal. That points to a ruling in 2027 at the earliest. Settlement is plausible because GEMA offers AI licensing and OpenAI has licensed content elsewhere. OpenAI may still prefer an appellate ruling given the precedent risk across the EU.
Novel EU law questions invite a stay or CJEU referral · First-instance reasoning reinforced by the consistent Suno judgment · No appellate hearing date set as of September 2026 · GEMA licensing model makes a negotiated deal feasible · Precedent risk pushes OpenAI to seek an appellate ruling
Generated automatically by Claude Opus 5.5 on Sep 26, 2026 from this case’s record on this site, and published without editorial review. The probabilities are the model’s judgment, not measured frequencies, and they are scored publicly as cases resolve. Not legal or investment advice. How the forecasts are made
Disclosure: Anthropic, which makes the model that wrote this forecast, competes with or has commercial ties to a party to this case.