The MPA vs. OpenAI: Why Opt-Out Systems Won’t Shield AI Platforms from Copyright Liability
The latest dispute between the Motion Picture Association (MPA) and OpenAI highlights the growing tension in the entertainment industry: who bears responsibility when artificial intelligence tools generate copyrighted content without permission?
Following the release of Sora 2, OpenAI’s new text-to-video model, the MPA called on the company to take “immediate action” to fix what it views as a flawed copyright opt-out system. The concern? Sora 2 users have already begun generating clips featuring copyrighted film characters and scenes, flooding social media with unlicensed derivatives of protected works.
At the heart of the MPA’s complaint is a fundamental issue of accountability. While OpenAI says it will soon offer rightsholders “more granular control” over character generation, that still places the burden on creators and studios to monitor and report infringements, rather than on the platform itself to prevent them. From a legal standpoint, this reversal of responsibility is problematic. Under well-established copyright law, platforms cannot simply shift the duty of protection to those whose works are being infringed.
The entertainment industry has long maintained that an opt-out approach, where creators must explicitly object to use of their material, fails to satisfy legal requirements. Copyright protection is automatic, not conditional on notice or registration. Allowing AI systems to ingest or reproduce copyrighted works unless told otherwise flips this principle on its head.
Recent litigation signals where this battle is headed. Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros. have already filed lawsuits against other AI platforms, including Midjourney, for enabling users to generate infringing images and videos. These cases argue that the platforms, not just individual users, are responsible for the unauthorized use of protected content. Even if a platform claims to rely on “fair use” or provides an opt-out, that doesn’t negate the underlying infringement when copyrighted material is copied, transformed, or distributed without permission.
The broader concern for rightsholders is scale. Unlike traditional piracy, AI-generated reproductions can multiply across platforms instantly, diluting creative ownership and threatening licensing revenues. If platforms like OpenAI don’t implement effective safeguards, creators could face an unmanageable wave of derivative content that undermines both artistic integrity and economic value.
For innovators developing AI tools, this moment is a turning point. Courts and regulators are increasingly likely to view opt-out mechanisms as insufficient. Proactive compliance, including preemptive filters, verified licensing frameworks, and human review systems, will soon be the standard expectation, not an afterthought.
The MPA’s statement makes one thing clear: Hollywood is no longer sitting on the sidelines of the AI debate. As AI-generated media becomes more sophisticated, the legal framework around creative ownership must evolve alongside it. The question now isn’t whether copyright law applies to AI, it’s how strictly it will be enforced.
At ARS Counsel, we help innovators, artists, and businesses navigate the evolving landscape of AI and intellectual property law. If your creative work or technology platform touches AI-generated content, now is the time to make sure your rights, and your risks, are protected. Contact us today to learn more.