The Human Consent Foundation, a nonprofit backed by Cate Blanchett, filed a 31-page amicus brief on Friday in The New York Times' copyright lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, arguing that licensing creative work for AI training is already practical at scale. The brief was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
CAA, the Music Artists Coalition and the National Association of Voice Actors co-signed the filing alongside other creator groups. An appendix lists Hollywood supporters including Anne Hathaway, Bette Midler, Emma Thompson, Helen Mirren, Dan Levy, Ron Howard, Madonna and Olivia Wilde.
The brief is aimed at three positions it attributes to OpenAI and Microsoft: that licensing creative works for AI training is cost-prohibitive, that there is no settled way to value training data, and that the industry lacks workable rights-clearance infrastructure. The filers call that a mischaracterization given an active licensing market.
Key facts
- 01The Human Consent Foundation filed a 31-page amicus brief on October 30, 2026, in the Southern District of New York.
- 02CAA, Music Artists Coalition and the National Association of Voice Actors co-signed the filing.
- 03Supporters listed in the appendix include Anne Hathaway, Emma Thompson, Ron Howard, Madonna and Olivia Wilde.
- 04SAG-AFTRA, the WGA and the American Federation of Musicians filed their own brief against OpenAI and Microsoft a day earlier.
- 05The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement in December 2023.
Its central claim is that the creative industries already have "a proven infrastructure and workflows to clear rights" for dispersed works at scale and at reasonable cost. The brief points to collective licensing bodies that have handled the dispersed-owner problem for more than a century through blanket licenses and metadata-driven systems, citing the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers and Broadcast Music, Inc. as examples.
Nikki Hexum, the foundation's co-founder and CEO, said the filing is meant to show the court how the creative industry actually works and to acknowledge the solutions that have already been built.
“We are not starting from scratch. There is already a functioning market and infrastructure for licensing creative work.”— Nikki Hexum, Co-founder and CEO, Human Consent Foundation
Blanchett said that over her career she has seen "rigorous adherence to chain-of-title protocols and digital rights management," and that using a person's face, voice or image should require asking first.
“Consent isn't a barrier to creativity, it is the foundation of it.”— Cate Blanchett, Actor and backer of the Human Consent Foundation
The filing follows a separate brief submitted Thursday by SAG-AFTRA, the Writers Guild of America and the American Federation of Musicians, which urged the court to reject a categorical fair use exemption for AI training. The unions argued that the tech companies' fair use claim "would render moot the terms the unions and the industry agreed to at the bargaining table."
OpenAI and Microsoft maintain that their use of the material constitutes fair use. Neither company responded to requests for comment on the new brief. When the Times first sued, OpenAI said it was surprised by the lawsuit and wanted to work with publishers on mutually beneficial arrangements.
The Times filed the case in December 2023, alleging copyright infringement. With this week's filings, the Human Consent Foundation and the three unions have both put Hollywood's licensing arguments before the court as it weighs the fair use dispute.
Working on something we should cover, or seeing a story we missed? Send leads, documents, or feedback to hello@aichatdaily.com. For sensitive tips, see our secure tips page for Signal and PGP options.
Spotted an error? Email hello@aichatdaily.com with the URL and the issue, or read our full corrections policy.
