GEMA vs ChatGPT
GEMA's lawsuit against OpenAI
GEMA is the first collecting society worldwide to file a landmark lawsuit against OpenAI, the company behind the AI-supported language model ChatGPT. The focus is on the unlicensed use of protected song lyrics from the repertoire of around 95,000 GEMA members, including well-known artists such as Reinhard Mey and Kristina Bach. The key question is whether the training and playback by generative AI systems constitutes copyright-relevant use. The lawsuit sends a clear signal: copyrights must also be respected in the age of AI.
What has happened?
On request, ChatGPT reproduces song lyrics that were apparently part of the AI's training material. However, OpenAI has neither acquired licenses nor remunerated the authors, as is required under Section 19a UrhG for making protected works available to the public. While other providers make license payments, GEMA believes that OpenAI is systematically acting without the necessary legal basis. A lawsuit has therefore been filed with the Munich Regional Court to stop these practices and to obtain a precedent-setting ruling.
Who is GEMA?
GEMA (Gesellschaft für musikalische Aufführungs- und mechanische Vervielfältigungsrechte) is one of the largest collecting societies in the world. Its central task is to manage and enforce the copyrights of music creators. It represents around 95,000 members, including composers, lyricists and music publishers, as well as over two million rights holders from all over the world.
GEMA ensures that the creative services of its members are remunerated for performances, broadcasts, reproductions and, more recently, for use by AI systems. This is done via licensing models that legally secure the use of copyrighted works and ensure fair remuneration for creative professionals. With the introduction of a special licensing model for generative AI, GEMA has taken an important step towards protecting the rights and interests of its members in this area too.
Is the use covered by text and data mining?
According to Section 44b UrhG, the text and data mining exception allows the automated evaluation of copyrighted content for analysis purposes. Whether this regulation is also applicable to the training of generative AI models remains controversial. Recent court rulings, such as by Hamburg District Court, suggest that this is possible in principle - but only if there is no express reservation of use by the copyright holder. GEMA has clearly communicated such reservations of use for its members, which could play a decisive role in the proceedings.
Economic impact of the lawsuit?
The lawsuit has far-reaching economic implications for both the AI sector and the creative industry. OpenAI, with annual revenues of over 2 billion dollars, could be significantly burdened by license payments and possible claims for damages. At the same time, the lawsuit signals that the use of protected content without remuneration for authors is not sustainable in the long term.
For the music industry, the process offers an opportunity to establish fair participation models for AI applications. GEMA has already developed a licensing model designed to ensure fair remuneration for music creators when training and generating new AI content. This could also force other AI providers to enter into similar agreements.
GEMA's lawsuit against OpenAI marks a turning point in the tension between technological innovation and copyright protection. While the courts have to clarify whether the limitation provisions of copyright law apply, GEMA clearly shows that the creative input of artists is not a free raw material for AI models. The decision could not only redefine the way generative AI is handled, but also have a lasting impact on the economic framework conditions for the entire creative industry.
Contact us if you have any questions
