Month: January 2026

The Regional Court of Munich’s November 2025 decision in GEMA v OpenAI marks a defining moment for the global conversation around copyright and AI. The court held that OpenAI’s ChatGPT had violated German copyright law by reproducing song lyrics from GEMA’s catalogue without proper licensing. In my opinion this ruling resonates far beyond Germany, signalling that in the age of generative AI, creators’ rights remain firmly protected. [i]

Background

GEMA, which represents composers, lyricists, and music publishers in Germany, brought the case over nine of the country’s best-known songs. These included Herbert Grönemeyer’s 1984 hit Männer and Helene Fischer’s Atemlos Durch die Nacht, which was the unofficial anthem of the German side during the 2014 Football World Cup. [ii]

When prompted by users, ChatGPT generated full or nearly complete versions of these copyrighted lyrics, showing that OpenAI’s system had “memorised” the works during training. OpenAI’s lawyers argued that its model did not store copyrighted text but generated new material based on statistical patterns. It also invoked the EU’s “text and data mining” (TDM) exception[iii], which allows limited use of data for machine learning. The court rejected this defence, concluding that reproducing song lyrics went beyond permissible data mining and amounted to infringement. As a result, GEMA was entitled to the claims for injunctive relief, information and damages.[iv]

Significance

This ruling should reshape how AI companies interact with creative industries. It establishes a clear precedent that “memorisation” within an AI system, where models can regenerate copyrighted works, may constitute reproduction under copyright law.

This is one of the first European judgments to hold an AI developer liable not for traditional copying, but for what its model learned and could later output. The court’s reasoning will likely influence how AI developers manage training data and licensing obligations. Developers may now need to obtain explicit permissions for copyrighted content used to train generative models, particularly music, literature, and art. The ruling may also push AI developers to disclose what data their models use, promoting transparency but also adding compliance challenges.

Interestingly, this strict interpretation contrasts with the UK’s Getty Images v Stability AI case[v]. There, the High Court found that Stability AI’s model had not infringed copyright because it learned from data statistically rather than storing it.[vi] This divergence highlights a growing legal gap between the EU and UK courts. While the UK leans toward a permissive view of machine learning, the EU appears to prioritise creators’ rights – even when innovation is at stake.

Key Takeaways

• Memorisation equals reproduction: If an AI model can regenerate protected works, that may amount to infringement.
• Dual exposure: Liability can arise both during training (embedding copyrighted works) and generation (reproducing them).
• Licensing obligations: Developers should secure rights for creative data sets before training.
• Jurisdictional divergence: Europe’s stricter approach diverges from the UK’s more flexible stance, creating compliance complexities for global developers.

Conclusion

GEMA v OpenAI [vii] underscores a pivotal shift in how courts interpret AI’s relationship with copyright. By recognising that training an AI can infringe when memorisation leads to faithful reproduction, the Munich court has drawn new lines in the sand. For AI developers, innovation must now consider alignment with established copyright principles. Whitestone will certainly working with it’s creative clients in music and the arts to look further into protecting their intellectual property rights.

© Lawrence Power 2025

---

[i] GEMA v OpenAI (Munich District Court I, 11 November 2025) < https://media.licdn.com/dms/document/media/v2/D4E1FAQGoTQ9DKfW1uw/feedshare-document-pdf-analyzed/B4EZp0_lp_IwAc-/0/1762899432336?e=1764201600&v=beta&t=HborRwy3RYuqCH4P0PabjE-jXUYKK7My5_vCGX7pTmg> accessed on 13 November 2025.

[ii] The Guardian, ‘ChatGPT violated copyright law by ‘learning’ from song lyrics German court rules’ , 2025, <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/nov/11/chatgpt-violated-copyright-laws-german-court-rules > accessed on 13 November 2025.

[iii] TDM, exception cite

[iv] GEMA v OpenAI (Munich District Court I, 11 November 2025) <  > accessed on 13 November 2025.

[v] Getty Images v Stability AI [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch).

[vi] Getty Images v Stability AI [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) [554].

[vii] GEMA v OpenAI (Munich District Court I, 11 November 2025) <  > accessed on 13 November 2025.

The newly appointed Chair of the Bar Council has called for renewed collaboration between barristers and solicitors to promote a fairer allocation of work at the Bar. Speaking at the start of her term, Kirsty Brimelow KC identified briefing practices as a key area where collective action could help address structural inequalities within the profession.

Brimelow’s remarks reflect long-standing concerns about how work is distributed across the Bar, particularly in relation to women, junior practitioners, and those from underrepresented backgrounds. While progress has been made in widening access to the profession, disparities in the allocation of briefs continue to affect career development, earnings, and retention. The new Chair has emphasised that meaningful reform in this area depends not only on the Bar itself, but also on the role of solicitors as gatekeepers of work.

Central to this agenda is closer engagement with the Law Society. Brimelow has indicated that cooperation between the two professional bodies will be essential if fairer briefing practices are to be embedded across the legal services market. By encouraging solicitors to take a more active and transparent approach to the choice of counsel, the Bar Council hopes to foster a culture in which opportunity is more evenly distributed.

The focus on briefing sits alongside a broader programme of reform outlined by the new Chair, which includes addressing pay gaps, improving wellbeing at the Bar, and supporting Chambers in reviewing internal practices. In particular, attention has been drawn to the cumulative impact of uneven briefing on long-term progression. Where certain groups are consistently overlooked for complex or high-value work, the effects can compound over time, reinforcing disparities in seniority and visibility.

Brimelow has also highlighted the importance of practical measures to support fairness, including greater awareness of briefing data and more open conversations between solicitors and Chambers about expectations and expertise. Rather than prescribing rigid rules, the emphasis has been placed on collaboration and professional responsibility, with the aim of achieving cultural change that is sustainable and widely supported.

The renewed focus on fair allocation comes at a time when the barristers profession continues to navigate wider pressures, including increased workloads, recruitment challenges and ongoing concerns about access to justice. Within this context, ensuring that work is distributed equitably is increasingly viewed as central to supporting a resilient and diverse Bar. For junior barristers in particular, access to a broad range of instructions can be decisive in building skills, confidence and long-term viability in practice. However, the truth is it is going to be very difficult to reform age old practice and relationships let alone navigate the internal office politics of who is fed what by whom. Any initiative needs to be monitored, audited and actually have teeth if it is to succeed.

The success of the Bar Council’s initiative will depend on the extent to which solicitors engage with and support these aims. If sustained cooperation can be achieved, the call for fairer briefing practices may mark an important step toward addressing entrenched inequalities and strengthening professional relationships across the legal sector. As Brimelow’s tenure begins, the issue of how work is distributed at the Bar is firmly positioned as a shared responsibility rather than an internal concern of Chambers alone.

© Whitestone Chambers 2026

The BBC sued again. More people refuse to pay the annual TV License Fee. Top jobs are lost. Crisis?

In the past 2 years we (@whitestonechambers) have acted in both Strictly Come Dancing & MasterChef to take legal action against the BBC.

Now a new Plaintiff (Claimant) arrives in FL…….

CNN, ABC, and Paramount/CBS are just a few of the five news agencies that Donald Trump has sued in recent years and as of December 2024, the BBC, (“Auntie”), can now add itself to this list after being hit with a $10 billion lawsuit seeking a minimum payout of $5 billion in damages across two separate issues.

The case surrounds part of the Panorama documentary, which was broadcast on October 28, 2024, in the wake of the upcoming presidential election. The video cropped together two parts of a speech Trump gave on January 6, 2021, where he stated, “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.” Later in the same speech, Trump proceeded to state, “And we fight. We fight like hell.” Ultimately, the clip in the video appeared to show President Trump say, “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol… and I’ll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.” In the eyes of the Trump team, this editing suggests that Trump was inciting the violence that would later take place during the January 6 Capitol riots, which led to multiple deaths and injured over 100 police officers.

In the lawsuit filed by the Trump legal team, the BBC is accused of both defamation and violating Florida law through its “deceptive” and “malicious” editing, which they state was done as an attempt to “interfere in and influence the [2024] election’s outcome to President Trump’s detriment.”

The BBC did apologise for the clip, acknowledging it gave a “mistaken impression” and both Tim Davie, (former BBC Corporation Director General), and Deborah Turness (former BBC Head of News) seemingly resigned in light of the situation. However, the BBC did not accept that the program was maliciously distributed to harm the Trump presidential campaign, which became the first element of the claim. The second element of this case is that the BBC violated trade practice law, as the program was available to viewers in the US through distribution rights acquired by Blue Ant Media.

The BBC has made clear that it intends to defend this case in multiple statements it has released, and its disagreement with both claims laid out in the suit comes as no surprise. However, BBC Chairman, Samir Shah, has also personally contacted the White House, offering a personal apology on behalf of the corporation. Legally, the BBC has laid out five arguments to refute the Trump team’s claims, stating that it did not stream Panorama in the US and that the shortening of the clip did not cause harm nor was it meant to mislead, as it simply shortened a long speech and should be considered in the larger context of the hour-long program.

In the end, as the Trump team seems set on pursuing this case, the BBC is left with the choice of agreeing a settlement or proceeding with the case. Either way, this case will present an interesting outcome not only due to its connection to freedom of speech and media but also in its effect on UK-US relations. Even though Prime Minister Keir Starmer has explicitly distanced the UK government from the BBC’s actions, Trump’s past conflicts with countries such as Canada and Mexico over the actions of private companies has demonstrated the possibility of backlash for US-UK relations.

© Lawrence Power 2026

References

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpvd81470v1o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kifz8BS0AWc

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0mx28vlp4wo

https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/trump-sues-bbc-defamation-over-editing-january-6-speech-2025-12-16

On 5 December 2025, Gulfstream Aerospace announced that its newest entrant in the business aviation market, the Gulfstream G300 super-midsize jet, had completed its maiden flight, signalling the formal launch of its flight-test programme and advancing the company’s strategic expansion in executive aviation.

The first prototype of the G300 took off from Ben Gurion International Airport in Israel at approximately 8:05 a.m. local time, where Gulfstream is collaborating with Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) on assembly for this model. The aircraft remained airborne for around two hours and 25 minutes, climbing to an altitude of roughly 30,000 feet and sustaining a cruise speed around Mach 0.75. 

This milestone follows an extensive period of ground testing, with the programme completing over 2,000 hours of preliminary trials before flying. The successful maiden sortie represents a significant step forward for Gulfstream’s development process and sets a structured path toward certification, with additional test aircraft already in production to expand the flight-test regimen. 

Redefining the Super-Midsize Segment

The G300 was first unveiled publicly in September 2025 at Gulfstream’s headquarters in Savannah, Georgia, as a modern successor to the company’s long-serving G280 model. Designed to bridge the gap between traditional midsize and long-range categories, the G300 seeks to offer operators a blend of long-range capability, advanced technology, and superior cabin comfort that challenges conventional segment boundaries.

According to Gulfstream’s published performance figures, the G300 is capable of flying approximately 3,600 nautical miles (about 6,667 kilometres) at a long-range cruise speed of Mach 0.80, with a slightly reduced range of around 3,000 nautical miles at the higher Mach 0.84 cruise setting. These figures position the aircraft competitively in the super-midsize class, offering operators trans-continental capability while maintaining operational flexibility.

To put these figures into perspective, if you are considering acquiring the G300, it offers seamless journeys from London to Dubai’s desert luxury or even nonstop travel from London to New York.  

Technology and Comfort at the Forefront

A chief selling point of the G300 is its cabin environment, which Gulfstream claims is the largest in its class, capable of accommodating up to ten passengers across two living areas. The design incorporates Gulfstream’s signature panoramic oval windows, ensuring a bright and open interior, alongside systems aimed at improving passenger comfort, including a low cabin altitude and advanced air filtration technologies. 

The aircraft’s avionics and cockpit systems are equally forward-looking. The G300 features Gulfstream’s Harmony Flight Deck, which integrates intuitive touchscreen controls and synthetic vision displays designed to enhance situational awareness and reduce pilot workload. Combined with performance attributes such as short-field capability and robust climb performance, these systems aim to deliver a class-leading operational experience. 

Implications for the Business Aviation Market

The G300’s inaugural flight comes at a time of sustained growth in the business aviation sector, where demand for flexible, long-range private travel continues to rise. By introducing a new aircraft that blends range, comfort, and technological sophistication, Gulfstream appears poised to reinforce its competitive position in the super-midsize segment against both legacy models and rival manufacturers. 

Looking ahead, the successful first flight lays the groundwork for subsequent phases of testing and regulatory certification. If the programme progresses on schedule, Gulfstream may soon offer operators an aircraft that embodies next-generation performance standards, which further shape expectations around capability, efficiency, and passenger experience in business jet travel.

Source: AeroTime

© Lawrence Power 2025