Case law on AI

• LG Munich, Urteil vom 11.11.2025 – Az. 42 O 14139/24 (GEMA v OpenAI), Infringement of copyright through the use of song lyrics in training language models and through their reproduction in chatbot outputs; not covered by the text and data mining exception.
• LG Hamburg, Beschluss vom 23.09.2025 – 324 O 461/25, Liability of AI providers for factually incorrect online posts by their bots (X and Grok).
• OLG Cologne, Urteil vom 23.05.2025 – 15 UKl 2/25 (Meta), Permissibility of data processing for AI training purposes by social media providers.
• OLG Celle, Beschluss vom 29.04.2025 - 5 U 1/25, Treatment of non-existent case law cited by counsel, presumably the result of GenAI "hallucinations", as unverifiable, incorrect citations.
• LG Hamburg, Urteil vom 27.09.2024 - 310 O 227/23 (LAION), Use of images as AI training data under articles 44a, 44b and 60d of the German Copyright Act (UrhG). [Appeal pending before the Higher Regional Court, decision expected on 10 December 2025]
• BGH Federal Court of Justice, Beschluss vom 11.06.2024 – X ZB 5/22, Only natural persons can be named inventors under German patent law.

Case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union

• CJEU, Judgment from 27.02.2025 – C-203/22 (Dun & Bradstreet Austria), Automated decision-making, right of access to information and trade secrets under the GDPR.
• CJEU, Case in progress – C-250/25 (Like Company), Generative AI (Gemini) and copyright under the CDSM Directive and the InfoSoc Directive.

National case law of other EU Member States

• Prague Municipal Court, Judgement of 11.10.2023 - 10 C 13/2023 (S. Š. v Taubel Legal), AI-generated content (DALL-E images) is not copyrightable for it is not a product of the creative work of a natural person.