{ "attribution": { "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16", "cite_as": "NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16)", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision", "version": "legal-2026-10-17", "fingerprint": "ewai:us:e7344b", "proof": "sha256:c83cb52124efbfb7ca981db2d0d3233b9ec3e5b75f56eaa0a0d4cc4921c5bcf7", "jurisdiction": "us", "lang": "en", "publisher": "NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal", "terms": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om" }, "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "item": { "schema_version": "1.0.0", "id": "us:ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16", "jurisdiction": "us", "lang": "en", "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "brand": { "product": "NovaCopilot", "platform": "ExploreWorldAI", "infrastructure": "ExploreWorld Legal", "infrastructure_url": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "legal_entity": "Valkiv Ventures AB", "permanent_url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot", "source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "powered_by": "Powered by NovaCopilot", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor" }, "sections": [ { "title": "Front matter", "paragraphs": [ "para_1", "para_2", "para_3", "para_4", "para_5", "para_6", "para_7", "para_8", "para_9", "para_10", "para_11", "para_12", "para_13", "para_14", "para_15", "para_16", "para_17", "para_18", "para_19", "para_20", "para_21", "para_22", "para_23", "para_24", "para_25", "para_26", "para_27", "para_28", "para_29", "para_30", "para_31", "para_32", "para_33", "para_34", "para_35", "para_36", "para_37", "para_38", "para_39", "para_40", "para_41", "para_42", "para_43", "para_44", "para_45", "para_46", "para_47", "para_48", "para_49", "para_50", "para_51" ], "kind": "front_matter" }, { "title": "SUMMARY**", "paragraphs": [ "para_52", "para_53", "para_54", "para_55", "para_56", "para_57", "para_58", "para_59", "para_60", "para_61", "para_62", "para_63", "para_64", "para_65", "para_66", "para_67", "para_68", "para_69", "para_70", "para_71", "para_72", "para_73", "para_74", "para_75", "para_76", "para_77", "para_78", "para_79", "para_80", "para_81", "para_82", "para_83", "para_84", "para_85", "para_86", "para_87", "para_88", "para_89", "para_90", "para_91", "para_92", "para_93", "para_94", "para_95", "para_96", "para_97", "para_98", "para_99", "para_100", "para_101", "para_102", "para_103", "para_104", "para_105", "para_106", "para_107", "para_108", "para_109", "para_110", "para_111", "para_112", "para_113", "para_114", "para_115", "para_116", "para_117", "para_118", "para_119", "para_120", "para_121", "para_122", "para_123", "para_124", "para_125", "para_126", "para_127", "para_128", "para_129", "para_130", "para_131", "para_132", "para_133", "para_134", "para_135", "para_136", "para_137", "para_138", "para_139", "para_140", "para_141", "para_142", "para_143", "para_144", "para_145", "para_146", "para_147", "para_148", "para_149", "para_150", "para_151", "para_152", "para_153", "para_154", "para_155", "para_156", "para_157", "para_158", "para_159", "para_160", "para_161", "para_162", "para_163", "para_164", "para_165", "para_166", "para_167", "para_168", "para_169", "para_170", "para_171", "para_172", "para_173", "para_174", "para_175", "para_176", "para_177", "para_178", "para_179", "para_180", "para_181", "para_182", "para_183", "para_184", "para_185", "para_186", "para_187", "para_188", "para_189", "para_190", "para_191", "para_192", "para_193", "para_194", "para_195", "para_196", "para_197", "para_198", "para_199", "para_200", "para_201", "para_202", "para_203", "para_204", "para_205", "para_206", "para_207", "para_208", "para_209", "para_210", "para_211", "para_212", "para_213", "para_214", "para_215", "para_216", "para_217", "para_218", "para_219", "para_220", "para_221", "para_222", "para_223", "para_224", "para_225", "para_226", "para_227", "para_228", "para_229", "para_230", "para_231", "para_232", "para_233", "para_234", "para_235", "para_236", "para_237", "para_238", "para_239", "para_240", "para_241", "para_242", "para_243", "para_244", "para_245", "para_246", "para_247", "para_248", "para_249", "para_250", "para_251", "para_252", "para_253", "para_254", "para_255", "para_256", "para_257", "para_258", "para_259", "para_260", "para_261", "para_262", "para_263", "para_264", "para_265", "para_266", "para_267", "para_268", "para_269", "para_270", "para_271", "para_272", "para_273", "para_274", "para_275", "para_276", "para_277", "para_278", "para_279", "para_280", "para_281", "para_282", "para_283", "para_284", "para_285", "para_286", "para_287", "para_288", "para_289", "para_290", "para_291", "para_292", "para_293", "para_294", "para_295", "para_296", "para_297", "para_298", "para_299", "para_300", "para_301", "para_302", "para_303", "para_304", "para_305", "para_306", "para_307", "para_308", "para_309", "para_310", "para_311", "para_312", "para_313", "para_314", "para_315", "para_316", "para_317", "para_318", "para_319", "para_320", "para_321", "para_322", "para_323", "para_324", "para_325", "para_326", "para_327", "para_328", "para_329", "para_330", "para_331", "para_332", "para_333", "para_334", "para_335", "para_336", "para_337", "para_338", "para_339", "para_340", "para_341", "para_342", "para_343", "para_344", "para_345", "para_346", "para_347", "para_348", "para_349", "para_350", "para_351", "para_352", "para_353", "para_354", "para_355", "para_356", "para_357", "para_358", "para_359", "para_360", "para_361", "para_362", "para_363", "para_364", "para_365", "para_366", "para_367", "para_368", "para_369", "para_370", "para_371", "para_372", "para_373", "para_374", "para_375", "para_376", "para_377", "para_378", "para_379", "para_380", "para_381", "para_382", "para_383", "para_384", "para_385", "para_386", "para_387", "para_388", "para_389", "para_390", "para_391", "para_392", "para_393", "para_394", "para_395", "para_396", "para_397", "para_398", "para_399", "para_400", "para_401", "para_402", "para_403", "para_404", "para_405", "para_406", "para_407", "para_408", "para_409", "para_410", "para_411", "para_412", "para_413", "para_414", "para_415", "para_416", "para_417", "para_418", "para_419", "para_420", "para_421", "para_422", "para_423", "para_424", "para_425", "para_426", "para_427", "para_428", "para_429", "para_430", "para_431", "para_432", "para_433", "para_434", "para_435", "para_436", "para_437", "para_438", "para_439", "para_440", "para_441", "para_442", "para_443", "para_444", "para_445", "para_446", "para_447", "para_448", "para_449", "para_450", "para_451", "para_452", "para_453", "para_454", "para_455", "para_456", "para_457", "para_458", "para_459", "para_460", "para_461", "para_462", "para_463", "para_464", "para_465", "para_466", "para_467", "para_468", "para_469", "para_470", "para_471", "para_472", "para_473", "para_474", "para_475", "para_476", "para_477", "para_478", "para_479", "para_480", "para_481", "para_482", "para_483", "para_484", "para_485", "para_486", "para_487", "para_488", "para_489", "para_490", "para_491", "para_492", "para_493", "para_494", "para_495", "para_496", "para_497", "para_498", "para_499", "para_500", "para_501", "para_502", "para_503", "para_504", "para_505", "para_506", "para_507", "para_508", "para_509", "para_510", "para_511", "para_512", "para_513", "para_514", "para_515", "para_516", "para_517", "para_518", "para_519", "para_520", "para_521", "para_522", "para_523", "para_524", "para_525", "para_526", "para_527", "para_528", "para_529", "para_530", "para_531", "para_532", "para_533", "para_534", "para_535", "para_536", "para_537", "para_538", "para_539", "para_540", "para_541", "para_542", "para_543", "para_544", "para_545", "para_546", "para_547", "para_548", "para_549", "para_550", "para_551", "para_552", "para_553", "para_554", "para_555", "para_556", "para_557", "para_558", "para_559", "para_560" ], "kind": "summary" } ], "paragraphs": [ { "text": "FOR PUBLICATION", "paragraph_id": "para_1" }, { "text": "UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS", "paragraph_id": "para_2" }, { "text": "FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT", "paragraph_id": "para_3" }, { "text": "J. DOE, 1; J. DOE, 2-5, individually", "paragraph_id": "para_4" }, { "text": "and on behalf of all others similarly", "paragraph_id": "para_5" }, { "text": "situated,", "paragraph_id": "para_6" }, { "text": "Plaintiffs - Appellants,", "paragraph_id": "para_7" }, { "text": "v.", "paragraph_id": "para_8" }, { "text": "GITHUB, INC., a Delaware", "paragraph_id": "para_9" }, { "text": "corporation; MICROSOFT", "paragraph_id": "para_10" }, { "text": "CORPORATION, a Washington", "paragraph_id": "para_11" }, { "text": "corporation; OPENAI, INC., a", "paragraph_id": "para_12" }, { "text": "Delaware nonprofit corporation;", "paragraph_id": "para_13" }, { "text": "OPENAI, LP, a Delaware limited", "paragraph_id": "para_14" }, { "text": "partnership; OPENAI GP, LLC, a", "paragraph_id": "para_15" }, { "text": "Delaware limited liability company;", "paragraph_id": "para_16" }, { "text": "OPENAI STARTUP FUND GP I,", "paragraph_id": "para_17" }, { "text": "LLC, a Delaware limited liability", "paragraph_id": "para_18" }, { "text": "company; OPENAI STARTUP", "paragraph_id": "para_19" }, { "text": "FUND I, LP, a Delaware limited", "paragraph_id": "para_20" }, { "text": "partnership; OPENAI STARTUP", "paragraph_id": "para_21" }, { "text": "FUND MANAGEMENT, LLC, a", "paragraph_id": "para_22" }, { "text": "Delaware limited liability company;", "paragraph_id": "para_23" }, { "text": "OPENAI OPCO, LLC; OPENAI,", "paragraph_id": "para_24" }, { "text": "LLC; OPENAI GLOBAL, LLC; OAI", "paragraph_id": "para_25" }, { "text": "CORPORATION; OPENAI", "paragraph_id": "para_26" }, { "text": "HOLDINGS, LLC; OPENAI", "paragraph_id": "para_27" }, { "text": "No. 24-7700", "paragraph_id": "para_28" }, { "text": "D.C. No.", "paragraph_id": "para_29" }, { "text": "4:22-cv-06823-", "paragraph_id": "para_30" }, { "text": "JST", "paragraph_id": "para_31" }, { "text": "OPINION", "paragraph_id": "para_32" }, { "text": "2 DOE V. GITHUB, INC.", "paragraph_id": "para_33" }, { "text": "HOLDCO, LLC; OPENAI", "paragraph_id": "para_34" }, { "text": "INVESTMENT; OPENAI", "paragraph_id": "para_35" }, { "text": "STARTUP FUND SPV I, LP;", "paragraph_id": "para_36" }, { "text": "OPENAI STARTUP FUND SPV GP", "paragraph_id": "para_37" }, { "text": "I, LLC,", "paragraph_id": "para_38" }, { "text": "Defendants - Appellees.", "paragraph_id": "para_39" }, { "text": "Appeal from the United States District Court", "paragraph_id": "para_40" }, { "text": "for the Northern District of California", "paragraph_id": "para_41" }, { "text": "Jon S. Tigar, District Judge, Presiding", "paragraph_id": "para_42" }, { "text": "Argued and Submitted February 11, 2026", "paragraph_id": "para_43" }, { "text": "San Francisco, California", "paragraph_id": "para_44" }, { "text": "Filed September 16, 2026", "paragraph_id": "para_45" }, { "text": "Before: Sidney R. Thomas and Eric D. Miller, Circuit", "paragraph_id": "para_46" }, { "text": "Judges, and Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr., District Judge.*", "paragraph_id": "para_47" }, { "text": "Opinion by Judge Miller", "paragraph_id": "para_48" }, { "text": "* The Honorable Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr., United States District Judge", "paragraph_id": "para_49" }, { "text": "for the Central District of California, sitting by designation.", "paragraph_id": "para_50" }, { "text": "DOE V. GITHUB, INC. 3", "paragraph_id": "para_51" }, { "text": "SUMMARY**", "paragraph_id": "para_52" }, { "text": "Digital Millennium Copyright Act", "paragraph_id": "para_53" }, { "text": "In an interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C.", "paragraph_id": "para_54" }, { "text": "§ 1292(b), the panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of", "paragraph_id": "para_55" }, { "text": "part of an action brought under the Digital Millennium", "paragraph_id": "para_56" }, { "text": "Copyright Act (“DMCA”) by programmers against GitHub,", "paragraph_id": "para_57" }, { "text": "Inc., and other defendants.", "paragraph_id": "para_58" }, { "text": "GitHub is a platform that allows developers to store,", "paragraph_id": "para_59" }, { "text": "manage, and share their code. GitHub Copilot and Codex", "paragraph_id": "para_60" }, { "text": "are tools that help programmers write code using artificial", "paragraph_id": "para_61" }, { "text": "intelligence—specifically, large language models that were", "paragraph_id": "para_62" }, { "text": "trained on millions of software projects on GitHub.", "paragraph_id": "para_63" }, { "text": "Plaintiffs alleged that Copilot and Codex reproduced their", "paragraph_id": "para_64" }, { "text": "code without attribution in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1202(b),", "paragraph_id": "para_65" }, { "text": "a provision of the DMCA.", "paragraph_id": "para_66" }, { "text": "The panel concluded that plaintiffs had Article III", "paragraph_id": "para_67" }, { "text": "standing to bring their DMCA claim because they plausibly", "paragraph_id": "para_68" }, { "text": "alleged a substantial risk of injury.", "paragraph_id": "para_69" }, { "text": "The panel nonetheless held that plaintiffs did not state a", "paragraph_id": "para_70" }, { "text": "claim under the DMCA because their allegations under an", "paragraph_id": "para_71" }, { "text": "“output” theory showed that Copilot and Codex do not", "paragraph_id": "para_72" }, { "text": "“remove or alter” copyright management information from", "paragraph_id": "para_73" }, { "text": "a copy of an existing protected work but instead create new", "paragraph_id": "para_74" }, { "text": "works that never contained that information.", "paragraph_id": "para_75" }, { "text": "** This summary constitutes no part of the opinion of the court. It has", "paragraph_id": "para_76" }, { "text": "been prepared by court staff for the convenience of the reader.", "paragraph_id": "para_77" }, { "text": "4 DOE V. GITHUB, INC.", "paragraph_id": "para_78" }, { "text": "The panel declined to consider, as forfeited, plaintiffs’", "paragraph_id": "para_79" }, { "text": "“input” theory of DMCA liability.", "paragraph_id": "para_80" }, { "text": "COUNSEL", "paragraph_id": "para_81" }, { "text": "Jesse Panuccio (argued), Daniel Morales, and Evan M.", "paragraph_id": "para_82" }, { "text": "Ezray, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, Fort Lauderdale, Florida;", "paragraph_id": "para_83" }, { "text": "Joshua M. Stein, Maxwell V. Pritt, and Margaux", "paragraph_id": "para_84" }, { "text": "Poueymirou, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, San Francisco,", "paragraph_id": "para_85" }, { "text": "California; Matthew Butterick, Butterick Law PC, Los", "paragraph_id": "para_86" }, { "text": "Angeles, California; Joseph R. Saveri, Christopher K.L.", "paragraph_id": "para_87" }, { "text": "Young, William W.C. Guardado, and Evan Creutz, Saveri", "paragraph_id": "para_88" }, { "text": "Law Firm LLP, San Francisco, California; for Plaintiffs-", "paragraph_id": "para_89" }, { "text": "Appellants.", "paragraph_id": "para_90" }, { "text": "Lisa S. Blatt (argued), Erin M. Sielaff, Claire R. Cahill,", "paragraph_id": "para_91" }, { "text": "Thomas G. Hentoff, and Claire L. Lazar, Williams &", "paragraph_id": "para_92" }, { "text": "Connolly LLP, Washington, D.C.; Christopher J. Cariello", "paragraph_id": "para_93" }, { "text": "(argued), Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, New York,", "paragraph_id": "para_94" }, { "text": "New York; Alyssa M. Caridis, and Geoffrey C. Shaw, Orrick", "paragraph_id": "para_95" }, { "text": "Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Los Angeles, California; Jonas", "paragraph_id": "para_96" }, { "text": "Q. Wang, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Washington,", "paragraph_id": "para_97" }, { "text": "D.C.; Nicholas Gonzalez and Annette L. Hurst, Orrick", "paragraph_id": "para_98" }, { "text": "Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, San Francisco, California;", "paragraph_id": "para_99" }, { "text": "Aileen McGrath, Joseph C. Gratz, and Tiffany Cheung,", "paragraph_id": "para_100" }, { "text": "Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, California; John", "paragraph_id": "para_101" }, { "text": "R. Lanham, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Diego,", "paragraph_id": "para_102" }, { "text": "California; for Defendants-Appellees.", "paragraph_id": "para_103" }, { "text": "Brian Scarpelli and Priya Nair, ACT The App Association,", "paragraph_id": "para_104" }, { "text": "Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae ACT The App", "paragraph_id": "para_105" }, { "text": "Association.", "paragraph_id": "para_106" }, { "text": "DOE V. GITHUB, INC. 5", "paragraph_id": "para_107" }, { "text": "Paul N. Harold, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati PC,", "paragraph_id": "para_108" }, { "text": "Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae Chamber of Progress", "paragraph_id": "para_109" }, { "text": "and Computer & Communications Industry Association.", "paragraph_id": "para_110" }, { "text": "Robert W. Clarida, Reitler Kailas & Rosenblatt LLP, New", "paragraph_id": "para_111" }, { "text": "York, New York, for Amici Curiae The Authors Guild Inc.,", "paragraph_id": "para_112" }, { "text": "The Association of American Publishers, The News/Media", "paragraph_id": "para_113" }, { "text": "Alliance, and The International Association of Scientific", "paragraph_id": "para_114" }, { "text": "Technical and Medical Publishers.", "paragraph_id": "para_115" }, { "text": "Corynne McSherry and Victoria Noble, Electronic Frontier", "paragraph_id": "para_116" }, { "text": "Foundation, San Francisco, California, for Amici Curiae", "paragraph_id": "para_117" }, { "text": "Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge.", "paragraph_id": "para_118" }, { "text": "Christopher Bavitz, Cyberlaw Clinic, Harvard Law School,", "paragraph_id": "para_119" }, { "text": "Cambridge, Massachusetts, for Amicus Curiae Authors", "paragraph_id": "para_120" }, { "text": "Alliance.", "paragraph_id": "para_121" }, { "text": "Jennifer M. Urban and Erik Stallman, Samuelson Law", "paragraph_id": "para_122" }, { "text": "Technology & Public Policy Clinic, University of California", "paragraph_id": "para_123" }, { "text": "at Berkeley School of Law, Berkeley, California, for Amici", "paragraph_id": "para_124" }, { "text": "Curiae Intellectual Property Law Professors.", "paragraph_id": "para_125" }, { "text": "OPINION", "paragraph_id": "para_126" }, { "text": "MILLER, Circuit Judge:", "paragraph_id": "para_127" }, { "text": "GitHub is a platform that allows developers to store,", "paragraph_id": "para_128" }, { "text": "manage, and share their code. GitHub Copilot (Copilot) and", "paragraph_id": "para_129" }, { "text": "Codex are tools that help programmers write code using", "paragraph_id": "para_130" }, { "text": "artificial intelligence—specifically, large language models", "paragraph_id": "para_131" }, { "text": "that were trained on millions of software projects on GitHub.", "paragraph_id": "para_132" }, { "text": "Plaintiffs are programmers who published open-source code", "paragraph_id": "para_133" }, { "text": "on GitHub. They believe that Copilot and Codex may", "paragraph_id": "para_134" }, { "text": "6 DOE V. GITHUB, INC.", "paragraph_id": "para_135" }, { "text": "reproduce their code without attribution and allege that, were", "paragraph_id": "para_136" }, { "text": "that to happen, it would violate 17 U.S.C. § 1202(b), enacted", "paragraph_id": "para_137" }, { "text": "as part of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA),", "paragraph_id": "para_138" }, { "text": "Pub. L. No. 105-304, § 103, 112 Stat. 2860, 2872 (1998).", "paragraph_id": "para_139" }, { "text": "Plaintiffs brought this action under the DMCA, and the", "paragraph_id": "para_140" }, { "text": "district court dismissed plaintiffs’ DMCA claims. We agree", "paragraph_id": "para_141" }, { "text": "with the district court that plaintiffs do not state a claim", "paragraph_id": "para_142" }, { "text": "under the DMCA because their allegations show that Copilot", "paragraph_id": "para_143" }, { "text": "and Codex do not “remove or alter” copyright management", "paragraph_id": "para_144" }, { "text": "information (CMI) from a copy of an existing protected", "paragraph_id": "para_145" }, { "text": "work but instead create new works that never contained that", "paragraph_id": "para_146" }, { "text": "information. See 17 U.S.C. § 1202(b)(1). We therefore", "paragraph_id": "para_147" }, { "text": "affirm.", "paragraph_id": "para_148" }, { "text": "I", "paragraph_id": "para_149" }, { "text": "Microsoft owns and operates GitHub, which is the", "paragraph_id": "para_150" }, { "text": "world’s largest hosting service for open-source software—", "paragraph_id": "para_151" }, { "text": "that is, software whose creators choose to make its source", "paragraph_id": "para_152" }, { "text": "code publicly available. Much of the code in public", "paragraph_id": "para_153" }, { "text": "repositories on GitHub is made available under open-source", "paragraph_id": "para_154" }, { "text": "licenses that permit other developers to use or modify that", "paragraph_id": "para_155" }, { "text": "code subject to certain conditions. One of the most common", "paragraph_id": "para_156" }, { "text": "conditions is attribution, meaning that a copy of the", "paragraph_id": "para_157" }, { "text": "license—including the author’s name and copyright", "paragraph_id": "para_158" }, { "text": "notice—must be included with any copy or derivative of the", "paragraph_id": "para_159" }, { "text": "code.", "paragraph_id": "para_160" }, { "text": "Microsoft is also a major investor in OpenAI, a company", "paragraph_id": "para_161" }, { "text": "that develops and sells artificial intelligence models. One of", "paragraph_id": "para_162" }, { "text": "OpenAI’s projects is Codex, a generative AI tool that works", "paragraph_id": "para_163" }, { "text": "autonomously to draft code based on a programmer’s", "paragraph_id": "para_164" }, { "text": "prompts. Copilot is a paid subscription service jointly", "paragraph_id": "para_165" }, { "text": "developed by GitHub and OpenAI that uses a modified", "paragraph_id": "para_166" }, { "text": "version of Codex to produce blocks of code in response to a", "paragraph_id": "para_167" }, { "text": "DOE V. GITHUB, INC. 7", "paragraph_id": "para_168" }, { "text": "user’s prompts. In all respects relevant to this case, Codex", "paragraph_id": "para_169" }, { "text": "and Copilot function similarly, so for simplicity, we will", "paragraph_id": "para_170" }, { "text": "refer solely to Copilot.", "paragraph_id": "para_171" }, { "text": "As described in the complaint, Copilot is a large", "paragraph_id": "para_172" }, { "text": "language model that works by identifying statistical patterns", "paragraph_id": "para_173" }, { "text": "in the structure of code. The model relies on those patterns", "paragraph_id": "para_174" }, { "text": "to identify the “most statistically likely completion, based on", "paragraph_id": "para_175" }, { "text": "the examples it reviewed in training,” to a particular prompt", "paragraph_id": "para_176" }, { "text": "or snippet of code. To identify relevant statistical patterns,", "paragraph_id": "para_177" }, { "text": "Copilot was trained on billions of lines of publicly available", "paragraph_id": "para_178" }, { "text": "code, including code from “all available public GitHub", "paragraph_id": "para_179" }, { "text": "repositories.”", "paragraph_id": "para_180" }, { "text": "Plaintiffs are programmers who have published", "paragraph_id": "para_181" }, { "text": "copyrighted code, subject to various licenses, on public", "paragraph_id": "para_182" }, { "text": "GitHub repositories. They brought this putative class action", "paragraph_id": "para_183" }, { "text": "against GitHub, Microsoft, and OpenAI in the Northern", "paragraph_id": "para_184" }, { "text": "District of California. After two rounds of dismissals and", "paragraph_id": "para_185" }, { "text": "amendments, the complaint has been whittled down to three", "paragraph_id": "para_186" }, { "text": "claims: one claim under the DMCA and two claims for", "paragraph_id": "para_187" }, { "text": "breach of contract.", "paragraph_id": "para_188" }, { "text": "Plaintiffs’ DMCA claim rests on their allegation that", "paragraph_id": "para_189" }, { "text": "Copilot will sometimes produce “identical copies of code", "paragraph_id": "para_190" }, { "text": "Copilot was trained on,” a possibility that “is only increasing", "paragraph_id": "para_191" }, { "text": "as the model scales.” The operative complaint includes", "paragraph_id": "para_192" }, { "text": "examples of cases in which Copilot reproduced “essentially", "paragraph_id": "para_193" }, { "text": "verbatim” copies of code written by the proposed class", "paragraph_id": "para_194" }, { "text": "representatives. Plaintiffs allege that when Copilot", "paragraph_id": "para_195" }, { "text": "reproduces code from its training materials, it does not", "paragraph_id": "para_196" }, { "text": "include the attribution, copyright notices, or other license", "paragraph_id": "para_197" }, { "text": "terms that were included with the code when it was", "paragraph_id": "para_198" }, { "text": "published on GitHub. Plaintiffs claim that this omission", "paragraph_id": "para_199" }, { "text": "violates section 1202(b) of the DMCA.", "paragraph_id": "para_200" }, { "text": "8 DOE V. GITHUB, INC.", "paragraph_id": "para_201" }, { "text": "“In enacting the DMCA, Congress sought to mitigate the", "paragraph_id": "para_202" }, { "text": "problems presented by copyright enforcement in the digital", "paragraph_id": "para_203" }, { "text": "age.” MDY Indus., LLC v. Blizzard Ent., Inc., 629 F.3d 928,", "paragraph_id": "para_204" }, { "text": "942 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing Universal City Studios, Inc. v.", "paragraph_id": "para_205" }, { "text": "Corley, 273 F.3d 429, 440 (2d Cir. 2001)). As relevant here,", "paragraph_id": "para_206" }, { "text": "section 1202 makes it unlawful to (1) “intentionally remove", "paragraph_id": "para_207" }, { "text": "or alter any [CMI],” (2) “distribute or import for distribution", "paragraph_id": "para_208" }, { "text": "[CMI] knowing that the [CMI] has been removed or altered", "paragraph_id": "para_209" }, { "text": "without authority of the copyright owner or the law,” or", "paragraph_id": "para_210" }, { "text": "(3) “distribute, import for distribution, or publicly perform", "paragraph_id": "para_211" }, { "text": "works, copies of works, or phonorecords, knowing that", "paragraph_id": "para_212" }, { "text": "[CMI] has been removed or altered without authority of the", "paragraph_id": "para_213" }, { "text": "copyright owner or the law.” 17 U.S.C. § 1202(b). The", "paragraph_id": "para_214" }, { "text": "DMCA defines CMI as certain “information conveyed in", "paragraph_id": "para_215" }, { "text": "connection with copies . . . of a work,” including “[t]he title", "paragraph_id": "para_216" }, { "text": "and other information identifying the work, including the", "paragraph_id": "para_217" }, { "text": "information set forth on a notice of copyright,” “[t]he name", "paragraph_id": "para_218" }, { "text": "of, and other identifying information about, the author” or", "paragraph_id": "para_219" }, { "text": "“the copyright owner of the work,” and the “[t]erms and", "paragraph_id": "para_220" }, { "text": "conditions for use of the work.” Id. § 1202(c). The DMCA", "paragraph_id": "para_221" }, { "text": "does not require works to include CMI or prescribe the", "paragraph_id": "para_222" }, { "text": "particular types of CMI that may be used. But if a work does", "paragraph_id": "para_223" }, { "text": "contain CMI, section 1202(b) protects that CMI from", "paragraph_id": "para_224" }, { "text": "deliberate removal or alteration.", "paragraph_id": "para_225" }, { "text": "The district court dismissed the DMCA claim under", "paragraph_id": "para_226" }, { "text": "Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), first with leave to", "paragraph_id": "para_227" }, { "text": "amend, and then with prejudice. The court reasoned “that", "paragraph_id": "para_228" }, { "text": "Section 1202(b) claims require that copies be ‘identical.’” It", "paragraph_id": "para_229" }, { "text": "emphasized plaintiffs’ allegations that Copilot’s output is", "paragraph_id": "para_230" }, { "text": "often a “near-identical copy” or “modified copy” of code on", "paragraph_id": "para_231" }, { "text": "GitHub, explaining that the complaint’s examples all", "paragraph_id": "para_232" }, { "text": "involved instances in which “the Copilot output is a", "paragraph_id": "para_233" }, { "text": "‘modified format,’ ‘variation[],’ or the ‘functional[]", "paragraph_id": "para_234" }, { "text": "DOE V. GITHUB, INC. 9", "paragraph_id": "para_235" }, { "text": "equivalent’ of the licensed code.” The court concluded that", "paragraph_id": "para_236" }, { "text": "those allegations were not sufficient to state a claim under", "paragraph_id": "para_237" }, { "text": "the DMCA because plaintiffs’ code and Copilot’s output", "paragraph_id": "para_238" }, { "text": "“were not identical.” The court denied a motion to dismiss", "paragraph_id": "para_239" }, { "text": "the contract claims, which remain pending.", "paragraph_id": "para_240" }, { "text": "The district court certified its order dismissing the", "paragraph_id": "para_241" }, { "text": "section 1202(b) claims for interlocutory appeal under 28", "paragraph_id": "para_242" }, { "text": "U.S.C. § 1292(b). The court held that “whether Sections", "paragraph_id": "para_243" }, { "text": "1202(b)(1) and (b)(3) of the DMCA impose an identicality", "paragraph_id": "para_244" }, { "text": "requirement” is a controlling question of law on which there", "paragraph_id": "para_245" }, { "text": "is substantial ground for difference of opinion.", "paragraph_id": "para_246" }, { "text": "We review de novo the district court’s grant of a motion", "paragraph_id": "para_247" }, { "text": "to dismiss. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Mahogany Meadows", "paragraph_id": "para_248" }, { "text": "Ave. Tr., 979 F.3d 1209, 1213 (9th Cir. 2020). “To survive a", "paragraph_id": "para_249" }, { "text": "motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient", "paragraph_id": "para_250" }, { "text": "factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that", "paragraph_id": "para_251" }, { "text": "is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,", "paragraph_id": "para_252" }, { "text": "678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.", "paragraph_id": "para_253" }, { "text": "544, 570 (2007)).", "paragraph_id": "para_254" }, { "text": "II", "paragraph_id": "para_255" }, { "text": "Plaintiffs have articulated two different theories of", "paragraph_id": "para_256" }, { "text": "DMCA violations. The first, which we will call the “input”", "paragraph_id": "para_257" }, { "text": "theory, is that defendants violated section 1202(b)(1) at the", "paragraph_id": "para_258" }, { "text": "training stage by removing CMI from putative class", "paragraph_id": "para_259" }, { "text": "members’ code before feeding the stripped code into Copilot", "paragraph_id": "para_260" }, { "text": "as training data. The second, which we will call the “output”", "paragraph_id": "para_261" }, { "text": "theory, is that Copilot sometimes returns memorized training", "paragraph_id": "para_262" }, { "text": "data as output to users without including the source code’s", "paragraph_id": "para_263" }, { "text": "CMI, and that in doing so Copilot “remove[s]” or “alter[s]”", "paragraph_id": "para_264" }, { "text": "CMI on copies of plaintiffs’ protected work, in violation of", "paragraph_id": "para_265" }, { "text": "section 1202(b)(1) and (3).", "paragraph_id": "para_266" }, { "text": "10 DOE V. GITHUB, INC.", "paragraph_id": "para_267" }, { "text": "We decline to consider the input theory because", "paragraph_id": "para_268" }, { "text": "plaintiffs forfeited it. Read in isolation, the complaint might", "paragraph_id": "para_269" }, { "text": "be understood to assert such a theory. For example, the", "paragraph_id": "para_270" }, { "text": "complaint alleges that “Defendants removed or altered CMI", "paragraph_id": "para_271" }, { "text": "from open-source code that is owned by Class members after", "paragraph_id": "para_272" }, { "text": "the code was uploaded to a GitHub repository by", "paragraph_id": "para_273" }, { "text": "incorporating it into Copilot with its CMI removed.” But", "paragraph_id": "para_274" }, { "text": "although plaintiffs at times gestured toward an input theory,", "paragraph_id": "para_275" }, { "text": "the district court made clear that it did not understand", "paragraph_id": "para_276" }, { "text": "plaintiffs to have asserted a claim based on that theory. At", "paragraph_id": "para_277" }, { "text": "the hearing on defendants’ first motion to dismiss, the court", "paragraph_id": "para_278" }, { "text": "asked whether the act of copying training data into Copilot", "paragraph_id": "para_279" }, { "text": "violated the attribution requirement of open-source licenses,", "paragraph_id": "para_280" }, { "text": "and plaintiffs’ counsel answered, “Perhaps it doesn’t.” The", "paragraph_id": "para_281" }, { "text": "court then observed that the “complaint is not about training.", "paragraph_id": "para_282" }, { "text": "It just isn’t.” And in the district court’s subsequent order", "paragraph_id": "para_283" }, { "text": "granting in part defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ first", "paragraph_id": "para_284" }, { "text": "complaint, the court stated unequivocally: “Plaintiffs do not", "paragraph_id": "para_285" }, { "text": "allege they were injured by Defendants’ use of licensed code", "paragraph_id": "para_286" }, { "text": "as training data.”", "paragraph_id": "para_287" }, { "text": "If plaintiffs believed that the district court misunderstood", "paragraph_id": "para_288" }, { "text": "their position, it was incumbent upon them to say so. But", "paragraph_id": "para_289" }, { "text": "plaintiffs did not do so, either orally or in writing. In arguing", "paragraph_id": "para_290" }, { "text": "that they preserved an input theory, plaintiffs point only to", "paragraph_id": "para_291" }, { "text": "their statement that “[t]he DMCA makes the mere removal", "paragraph_id": "para_292" }, { "text": "of CMI from digital copies illegal before distribution of", "paragraph_id": "para_293" }, { "text": "copies” and to one of OpenAI’s filings, in which OpenAI", "paragraph_id": "para_294" }, { "text": "purportedly acknowledged that plaintiffs advanced a claim", "paragraph_id": "para_295" }, { "text": "based on “the pre-distribution removal of CMI.” Plaintiffs’", "paragraph_id": "para_296" }, { "text": "statement was part of their explanation of the distinction", "paragraph_id": "para_297" }, { "text": "between section 1202(b)(1) and section 1202(b)(3) and did", "paragraph_id": "para_298" }, { "text": "not suggest disagreement with the district court’s conclusion", "paragraph_id": "para_299" }, { "text": "that the complaint did not advance an input theory. And the", "paragraph_id": "para_300" }, { "text": "DOE V. GITHUB, INC. 11", "paragraph_id": "para_301" }, { "text": "cited OpenAI filing argued that plaintiffs’ second amended", "paragraph_id": "para_302" }, { "text": "complaint “admits that no pre-distribution [CMI] removal", "paragraph_id": "para_303" }, { "text": "occurred” and does not allege any claim based on a pre-", "paragraph_id": "para_304" }, { "text": "distribution removal theory. Plaintiffs have identified", "paragraph_id": "para_305" }, { "text": "nothing in their district court briefing after the first motion", "paragraph_id": "para_306" }, { "text": "to dismiss that would have put the court on notice that they", "paragraph_id": "para_307" }, { "text": "wished to pursue an input theory. We therefore conclude that", "paragraph_id": "para_308" }, { "text": "plaintiffs forfeited the theory.", "paragraph_id": "para_309" }, { "text": "III", "paragraph_id": "para_310" }, { "text": "As to the output theory, defendants argue that plaintiffs", "paragraph_id": "para_311" }, { "text": "lack standing because they did not adequately allege that", "paragraph_id": "para_312" }, { "text": "their code will be subject to copying by Copilot without", "paragraph_id": "para_313" }, { "text": "reproduction of the accompanying CMI. The district court", "paragraph_id": "para_314" }, { "text": "did not address standing in its order granting the motion to", "paragraph_id": "para_315" }, { "text": "dismiss, and the question certified for appeal does not", "paragraph_id": "para_316" }, { "text": "discuss standing. But our jurisdiction under section 1292(b)", "paragraph_id": "para_317" }, { "text": "“applies to the order certified to the court of appeals, and is", "paragraph_id": "para_318" }, { "text": "not tied to the particular question formulated by the district", "paragraph_id": "para_319" }, { "text": "court.” Yamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A. v. Calhoun, 516 U.S.", "paragraph_id": "para_320" }, { "text": "199, 205 (1996). We therefore “may address any issue fairly", "paragraph_id": "para_321" }, { "text": "included within the certified order.” Id. That includes the", "paragraph_id": "para_322" }, { "text": "question of standing. Although that question was “not", "paragraph_id": "para_323" }, { "text": "expressly certified,” the district court had addressed it in an", "paragraph_id": "para_324" }, { "text": "earlier order, and it is “fairly raised by the order under", "paragraph_id": "para_325" }, { "text": "review.” Lee v. American Nat’l Ins. Co., 260 F.3d 997, 1001", "paragraph_id": "para_326" }, { "text": "(9th Cir. 2001).", "paragraph_id": "para_327" }, { "text": "To establish Article III standing, a plaintiff must show,", "paragraph_id": "para_328" }, { "text": "among other things, that it faces an injury in fact—that is,", "paragraph_id": "para_329" }, { "text": "“an invasion of a legally protected interest which is", "paragraph_id": "para_330" }, { "text": "(a) concrete and particularized and (b) actual or imminent,", "paragraph_id": "para_331" }, { "text": "not conjectural or hypothetical.” Lujan v. Defenders of", "paragraph_id": "para_332" }, { "text": "Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992) (citation, internal", "paragraph_id": "para_333" }, { "text": "12 DOE V. GITHUB, INC.", "paragraph_id": "para_334" }, { "text": "quotation marks, and footnote omitted). “An allegation of", "paragraph_id": "para_335" }, { "text": "future injury” can establish standing if “there is a substantial", "paragraph_id": "para_336" }, { "text": "risk that the harm will occur.” Susan B. Anthony List v.", "paragraph_id": "para_337" }, { "text": "Driehaus, 573 U.S. 149, 158 (2014) (citation and internal", "paragraph_id": "para_338" }, { "text": "quotation marks omitted). Allegations of standing “must be", "paragraph_id": "para_339" }, { "text": "supported in the same way as any other matter on which the", "paragraph_id": "para_340" }, { "text": "plaintiff bears the burden of proof, i.e., with the manner and", "paragraph_id": "para_341" }, { "text": "degree of evidence required at the successive stages of the", "paragraph_id": "para_342" }, { "text": "litigation.” Lujan, 504 U.S. at 561. “At the pleading stage,", "paragraph_id": "para_343" }, { "text": "general factual allegations of injury resulting from the", "paragraph_id": "para_344" }, { "text": "defendant’s conduct may suffice” because courts must", "paragraph_id": "para_345" }, { "text": "“presum[e] that general allegations embrace those specific", "paragraph_id": "para_346" }, { "text": "facts that are necessary to support the claim.” Id. (quoting", "paragraph_id": "para_347" }, { "text": "Lujan v. National Wildlife Fed’n, 497 U.S. 871, 889 (1990)).", "paragraph_id": "para_348" }, { "text": "According to defendants, even if Copilot makes copies", "paragraph_id": "para_349" }, { "text": "of code without CMI, the risk that it will reproduce", "paragraph_id": "para_350" }, { "text": "plaintiffs’ code—rather than the code of some other GitHub", "paragraph_id": "para_351" }, { "text": "contributor—is “no more than conjecture.” City of Los", "paragraph_id": "para_352" }, { "text": "Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 108 (1983). We disagree. The", "paragraph_id": "para_353" }, { "text": "complaint alleges a substantial risk of injury because it states", "paragraph_id": "para_354" }, { "text": "that “Copilot reproduces the code of the Named Plaintiffs", "paragraph_id": "para_355" }, { "text": "without attribution,” “that many if not all prompts entered", "paragraph_id": "para_356" }, { "text": "into Copilot will readily cause it to emit verbatim, near-", "paragraph_id": "para_357" }, { "text": "verbatim, or modified copies of Licensed Material that", "paragraph_id": "para_358" }, { "text": "violate the licenses under which the source code is", "paragraph_id": "para_359" }, { "text": "published,” that “[i]t is therefore likely if not certain that", "paragraph_id": "para_360" }, { "text": "verbatim, near-verbatim or modified copies of each", "paragraph_id": "para_361" }, { "text": "Plaintiff[’s] code have already been emitted by Copilot,” and", "paragraph_id": "para_362" }, { "text": "that “each day these violations must be accruing with", "paragraph_id": "para_363" }, { "text": "astonishing frequency.”", "paragraph_id": "para_364" }, { "text": "Of course, a complaint must “contain sufficient factual", "paragraph_id": "para_365" }, { "text": "matter” to make the stated allegations plausible. Iqbal, 556", "paragraph_id": "para_366" }, { "text": "U.S. at 678. But the complaint here meets that standard. The", "paragraph_id": "para_367" }, { "text": "DOE V. GITHUB, INC. 13", "paragraph_id": "para_368" }, { "text": "complaint cites academic research finding that large", "paragraph_id": "para_369" }, { "text": "language models will sometimes “emit the memorized", "paragraph_id": "para_370" }, { "text": "training data verbatim,” a phenomenon that “will likely get", "paragraph_id": "para_371" }, { "text": "worse as models continue[] to scale.” The complaint notes", "paragraph_id": "para_372" }, { "text": "that GitHub has implemented a duplicate-detection feature", "paragraph_id": "para_373" }, { "text": "that allows users to block output suggestions matching", "paragraph_id": "para_374" }, { "text": "public code—specifically, verbatim snippets of 150", "paragraph_id": "para_375" }, { "text": "characters or more—which is some evidence that Copilot", "paragraph_id": "para_376" }, { "text": "can and does emit literally identical copies of code. And the", "paragraph_id": "para_377" }, { "text": "complaint also provides examples of cases in which Copilot", "paragraph_id": "para_378" }, { "text": "reproduced portions of the named plaintiffs’ code verbatim.", "paragraph_id": "para_379" }, { "text": "If this case were to proceed to summary judgment,", "paragraph_id": "para_380" }, { "text": "plaintiffs would need to present evidence sufficient to create", "paragraph_id": "para_381" }, { "text": "a genuine factual issue as to whether they face a “substantial", "paragraph_id": "para_382" }, { "text": "risk” of harm. Susan B. Anthony List, 573 U.S. at 158. We", "paragraph_id": "para_383" }, { "text": "need not determine whether the evidence referred to in the", "paragraph_id": "para_384" }, { "text": "complaint would be sufficient to meet that standard. But the", "paragraph_id": "para_385" }, { "text": "factual allegations in the complaint make it plausible that", "paragraph_id": "para_386" }, { "text": "plaintiffs face a substantial risk, and that is enough to survive", "paragraph_id": "para_387" }, { "text": "a motion to dismiss.", "paragraph_id": "para_388" }, { "text": "IV", "paragraph_id": "para_389" }, { "text": "Turning to the merits of the output theory, we agree with", "paragraph_id": "para_390" }, { "text": "the district court that the complaint does not state a claim", "paragraph_id": "para_391" }, { "text": "under the DMCA. The complaint describes an AI tool that", "paragraph_id": "para_392" }, { "text": "does not look up and reproduce stored work but rather", "paragraph_id": "para_393" }, { "text": "creates new work. That new work may or may not infringe", "paragraph_id": "para_394" }, { "text": "plaintiffs’ copyrights in their code, but it cannot reasonably", "paragraph_id": "para_395" }, { "text": "be described as a copy of that code from which CMI has been", "paragraph_id": "para_396" }, { "text": "“removed” or “altered.”", "paragraph_id": "para_397" }, { "text": "“[W]e start where we always do: with the text of the", "paragraph_id": "para_398" }, { "text": "statute.” Van Buren v. United States, 593 U.S. 374, 381", "paragraph_id": "para_399" }, { "text": "(2021). Section 1202(b) provides that “[n]o person shall,", "paragraph_id": "para_400" }, { "text": "14 DOE V. GITHUB, INC.", "paragraph_id": "para_401" }, { "text": "without the authority of the copyright owner or the law,”", "paragraph_id": "para_402" }, { "text": "“intentionally remove or alter any copyright management", "paragraph_id": "para_403" }, { "text": "information” or “distribute . . . works [or] copies of works,", "paragraph_id": "para_404" }, { "text": ". . . knowing that copyright management information has", "paragraph_id": "para_405" }, { "text": "been removed or altered without authority of the copyright", "paragraph_id": "para_406" }, { "text": "owner or the law.” 17 U.S.C. § 1202(b)(1), (3). The verb", "paragraph_id": "para_407" }, { "text": "“remove” means “to get rid of,” while “alter” means “to", "paragraph_id": "para_408" }, { "text": "cause to become different in some particular characteristic.”", "paragraph_id": "para_409" }, { "text": "Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 63, 1921", "paragraph_id": "para_410" }, { "text": "(1993). In context, both verbs imply taking an affirmative", "paragraph_id": "para_411" }, { "text": "act with respect to CMI connected to a work that already", "paragraph_id": "para_412" }, { "text": "exists. See, e.g., 4 Nimmer on Copyright § 12A.10[B][1][a]", "paragraph_id": "para_413" }, { "text": "(2026) (citing “defacing . . . the title page of a book” or", "paragraph_id": "para_414" }, { "text": "“delet[ing] the electronic information that may accompany a", "paragraph_id": "para_415" }, { "text": "computer file” as paradigmatic section 1202(b) violations).", "paragraph_id": "para_416" }, { "text": "One who creates a new work and fails to include CMI cannot", "paragraph_id": "para_417" }, { "text": "be said to have “removed” or “altered” anything. See", "paragraph_id": "para_418" }, { "text": "Falkner v. General Motors LLC, 393 F. Supp. 3d 927, 938", "paragraph_id": "para_419" }, { "text": "(C.D. Cal. 2018) (explaining that mere “failure to include”", "paragraph_id": "para_420" }, { "text": "CMI does not “constitute[] removal or alteration” of CMI);", "paragraph_id": "para_421" }, { "text": "accord Kipp Flores Architects, LLC v. AMH Creekside Dev.,", "paragraph_id": "para_422" }, { "text": "LLC, No. 23-50750, 2026 WL 2453096, at *13–17 (5th Cir.", "paragraph_id": "para_423" }, { "text": "Aug. 21, 2026) (opinion of Willett, J.). Instead, removal or", "paragraph_id": "para_424" }, { "text": "alteration requires taking away or changing attribution", "paragraph_id": "para_425" }, { "text": "information from an existing work.", "paragraph_id": "para_426" }, { "text": "The statutory definition of CMI reinforces this reading.", "paragraph_id": "para_427" }, { "text": "CMI is “information conveyed in connection with copies . . .", "paragraph_id": "para_428" }, { "text": "of a work,” not in connection with excerpts or derivative", "paragraph_id": "para_429" }, { "text": "works. 17 U.S.C. § 1202(c) (emphasis added). A “copy” of", "paragraph_id": "para_430" }, { "text": "a work is a “material object[] . . . in which a work is fixed,”", "paragraph_id": "para_431" }, { "text": "id. § 101, so CMI is information that exists in connection", "paragraph_id": "para_432" }, { "text": "with those material objects. Violating section 1202(b)", "paragraph_id": "para_433" }, { "text": "requires removing or altering the CMI on those material", "paragraph_id": "para_434" }, { "text": "DOE V. GITHUB, INC. 15", "paragraph_id": "para_435" }, { "text": "objects, such as by reprinting an image while cropping out", "paragraph_id": "para_436" }, { "text": "the “printed gutter credit near the [i]mage” identifying the", "paragraph_id": "para_437" }, { "text": "photographer. Murphy v. Millennium Radio Grp., 650 F.3d", "paragraph_id": "para_438" }, { "text": "295, 305 (3d Cir. 2011); see also Falkner, 393 F. Supp. 3d", "paragraph_id": "para_439" }, { "text": "at 938–39 (photographer did not remove or alter CMI when", "paragraph_id": "para_440" }, { "text": "he photographed a mural from an angle that rendered the", "paragraph_id": "para_441" }, { "text": "artist’s signature not visible). To state a claim under section", "paragraph_id": "para_442" }, { "text": "1202, plaintiffs must therefore allege that defendants", "paragraph_id": "para_443" }, { "text": "removed or altered CMI from copies of existing protected", "paragraph_id": "para_444" }, { "text": "works; merely alleging that a similar or derivative work does", "paragraph_id": "para_445" }, { "text": "not include the CMI, without facts showing its removal or", "paragraph_id": "para_446" }, { "text": "alteration, is insufficient.", "paragraph_id": "para_447" }, { "text": "The district court and defendants characterize this", "paragraph_id": "para_448" }, { "text": "principle as the DMCA’s “identicality” requirement. But", "paragraph_id": "para_449" }, { "text": "“identicality” is something of a misnomer because the", "paragraph_id": "para_450" }, { "text": "DMCA does not require literal identicality between the", "paragraph_id": "para_451" }, { "text": "plaintiff’s work and the allegedly infringing work. The", "paragraph_id": "para_452" }, { "text": "concept of “identicality” is best understood as a gloss on the", "paragraph_id": "para_453" }, { "text": "statutory terms “remove,” “alter,” and “copies” rather than", "paragraph_id": "para_454" }, { "text": "an independent (and atextual) element of a section 1202(b)", "paragraph_id": "para_455" }, { "text": "claim.", "paragraph_id": "para_456" }, { "text": "To the extent identicality is relevant, it is because one", "paragraph_id": "para_457" }, { "text": "way to determine whether CMI has been “remove[d]” from", "paragraph_id": "para_458" }, { "text": "a copyrighted work is to compare the allegedly infringing", "paragraph_id": "para_459" }, { "text": "copy with the original. If the two works are otherwise", "paragraph_id": "para_460" }, { "text": "identical—sharing, for example, the same composition,", "paragraph_id": "para_461" }, { "text": "cropping, or other distinctive features—but the allegedly", "paragraph_id": "para_462" }, { "text": "infringing version omits the CMI that accompanied the", "paragraph_id": "para_463" }, { "text": "original, a factfinder may reasonably infer that the defendant", "paragraph_id": "para_464" }, { "text": "removed CMI from the copied work. We relied on just such", "paragraph_id": "para_465" }, { "text": "a comparison in Friedman v. Live Nation Merchandise, Inc.,", "paragraph_id": "para_466" }, { "text": "where we held that because the allegedly infringing", "paragraph_id": "para_467" }, { "text": "photographs were “exact copies” of the images as they", "paragraph_id": "para_468" }, { "text": "16 DOE V. GITHUB, INC.", "paragraph_id": "para_469" }, { "text": "appeared in the copyright owner’s book, and “[b]ecause the", "paragraph_id": "para_470" }, { "text": "only material difference” in the allegedly infringing versions", "paragraph_id": "para_471" }, { "text": "“was that the CMI was missing, it was necessarily the case", "paragraph_id": "para_472" }, { "text": "that the CMI had been removed on the copied version.” 833", "paragraph_id": "para_473" }, { "text": "F.3d 1180, 1188 (9th Cir. 2016). Although substantial", "paragraph_id": "para_474" }, { "text": "reproduction of a plaintiff’s existing work without CMI is", "paragraph_id": "para_475" }, { "text": "not always dispositive, it will often be strong circumstantial", "paragraph_id": "para_476" }, { "text": "evidence that the defendant removed CMI from a copy of the", "paragraph_id": "para_477" }, { "text": "plaintiff’s work. On the other hand, material differences", "paragraph_id": "para_478" }, { "text": "between the works may suggest that the defendant instead", "paragraph_id": "para_479" }, { "text": "created a new, derivative work to which the plaintiff’s CMI", "paragraph_id": "para_480" }, { "text": "was never attached and from which the defendant could not", "paragraph_id": "para_481" }, { "text": "have “removed” or “altered” CMI.", "paragraph_id": "para_482" }, { "text": "Plaintiffs observe that requiring literal identicality would", "paragraph_id": "para_483" }, { "text": "make it easy to circumvent the DMCA: So long as the", "paragraph_id": "para_484" }, { "text": "defendant changed one word on one page of a book, in", "paragraph_id": "para_485" }, { "text": "addition to deleting the CMI, that person would avoid", "paragraph_id": "para_486" }, { "text": "violating section 1202(b) because the original and allegedly", "paragraph_id": "para_487" }, { "text": "infringing versions would not be identical. But as defendants", "paragraph_id": "para_488" }, { "text": "concede, the two works need not be literally identical to", "paragraph_id": "para_489" }, { "text": "support an inference that CMI has been removed. See Real", "paragraph_id": "para_490" }, { "text": "World Media LLC v. Daily Caller, Inc., 744 F. Supp. 3d 24,", "paragraph_id": "para_491" }, { "text": "40 (D.D.C. 2024) (“[I]t would be odd if a defendant could", "paragraph_id": "para_492" }, { "text": "evade DMCA liability by removing or altering CMI in a", "paragraph_id": "para_493" }, { "text": "copied work but only disseminating 99% rather than 100%", "paragraph_id": "para_494" }, { "text": "of that work.”). Minor cosmetic changes will not necessarily", "paragraph_id": "para_495" }, { "text": "protect a defendant who substantially or entirely reproduces", "paragraph_id": "para_496" }, { "text": "the protected work and removes CMI. See New York Times", "paragraph_id": "para_497" }, { "text": "Co. v. Microsoft Corp., 777 F. Supp. 3d 283, 317 (S.D.N.Y.", "paragraph_id": "para_498" }, { "text": "2025).", "paragraph_id": "para_499" }, { "text": "But that concession does not help plaintiffs because they", "paragraph_id": "para_500" }, { "text": "have not alleged removal of CMI from a copy of their work,", "paragraph_id": "para_501" }, { "text": "even one with minor alterations. In reaching that conclusion,", "paragraph_id": "para_502" }, { "text": "DOE V. GITHUB, INC. 17", "paragraph_id": "para_503" }, { "text": "we recognize the limitation of relying on examples involving", "paragraph_id": "para_504" }, { "text": "traditional print media, such as when a defendant has", "paragraph_id": "para_505" }, { "text": "“defac[ed] . . . the title page of a book,” 4 Nimmer on", "paragraph_id": "para_506" }, { "text": "Copyright § 12A.10[B][1][a] (2026). While such examples", "paragraph_id": "para_507" }, { "text": "may provide a useful starting point for reasoning by analogy,", "paragraph_id": "para_508" }, { "text": "they do not map neatly onto the emerging digital", "paragraph_id": "para_509" }, { "text": "technologies like artificial intelligence to which the", "paragraph_id": "para_510" }, { "text": "DMCA’s protections also apply. Even so, plaintiffs’ own", "paragraph_id": "para_511" }, { "text": "allegations about Copilot show that it is best understood as", "paragraph_id": "para_512" }, { "text": "learning from existing works and then creating new works", "paragraph_id": "para_513" }, { "text": "based on that learning process, not as making copies of", "paragraph_id": "para_514" }, { "text": "existing works.", "paragraph_id": "para_515" }, { "text": "According to the complaint, Copilot relies on a “complex", "paragraph_id": "para_516" }, { "text": "probabilistic process” to predict “the most likely solution to", "paragraph_id": "para_517" }, { "text": "a given prompt,” based on “the solution it has found in the", "paragraph_id": "para_518" }, { "text": "most projects” answering similar questions. Sometimes,", "paragraph_id": "para_519" }, { "text": "plaintiffs allege, that output may match snippets of “code", "paragraph_id": "para_520" }, { "text": "from the training data.” But their account of the algorithm’s", "paragraph_id": "para_521" }, { "text": "internal process—inferring “statistical patterns governing", "paragraph_id": "para_522" }, { "text": "the structure of code” and identifying the most likely", "paragraph_id": "para_523" }, { "text": "completion—does not describe an action taken with respect", "paragraph_id": "para_524" }, { "text": "to CMI attached to an existing work. Instead, it describes a", "paragraph_id": "para_525" }, { "text": "process through which Copilot generates new works. In that", "paragraph_id": "para_526" }, { "text": "respect, it differs from a traditional search engine, which, in", "paragraph_id": "para_527" }, { "text": "response to a user’s query, retrieves and displays stored", "paragraph_id": "para_528" }, { "text": "information—that is, copies of materials that already exist.", "paragraph_id": "para_529" }, { "text": "If Copilot functioned like a search engine and produced", "paragraph_id": "para_530" }, { "text": "outputs that were identical to plaintiffs’ code but did not", "paragraph_id": "para_531" }, { "text": "contain CMI, then plaintiffs might have a stronger claim that", "paragraph_id": "para_532" }, { "text": "Copilot had removed their CMI. But that is not what", "paragraph_id": "para_533" }, { "text": "plaintiffs have alleged.", "paragraph_id": "para_534" }, { "text": "To be sure, Copilot’s output may in some cases be", "paragraph_id": "para_535" }, { "text": "substantially similar to existing code. As the district court", "paragraph_id": "para_536" }, { "text": "18 DOE V. GITHUB, INC.", "paragraph_id": "para_537" }, { "text": "observed, Copilot may produce “a ‘modified format,’", "paragraph_id": "para_538" }, { "text": "‘variation[],’ or the ‘functional[] equivalent’ of the licensed", "paragraph_id": "para_539" }, { "text": "code” without the CMI. We express no view on whether that", "paragraph_id": "para_540" }, { "text": "similarity would allow plaintiffs to assert a claim for", "paragraph_id": "para_541" }, { "text": "copyright infringement. But we note that many copyright", "paragraph_id": "para_542" }, { "text": "cases involve the creation of a work that is substantially", "paragraph_id": "para_543" }, { "text": "similar to the plaintiff’s without attribution. See Yonay v.", "paragraph_id": "para_544" }, { "text": "Paramount Pictures Corp., 163 F.4th 685, 692 (9th Cir.", "paragraph_id": "para_545" }, { "text": "2026) (“To show unlawful appropriation,” a plaintiff must", "paragraph_id": "para_546" }, { "text": "show “that the works in question share ‘substantial similarity", "paragraph_id": "para_547" }, { "text": "in protectable expression.’” (emphasis omitted) (quoting", "paragraph_id": "para_548" }, { "text": "Skidmore as Tr. for Randy Craig Wolfe Tr. v. Led Zeppelin,", "paragraph_id": "para_549" }, { "text": "952 F.3d 1051, 1064 (9th Cir. 2020) (en banc))). If that were", "paragraph_id": "para_550" }, { "text": "all it took to violate section 1202(b), the DMCA would", "paragraph_id": "para_551" }, { "text": "supplant traditional copyright protections and subject", "paragraph_id": "para_552" }, { "text": "defendants to potentially ruinous liability under the", "paragraph_id": "para_553" }, { "text": "DMCA’s enhanced statutory damages. Compare 17 U.S.C.", "paragraph_id": "para_554" }, { "text": "§ 1203(c)(3) (permitting up to $25,000 per violation) with", "paragraph_id": "para_555" }, { "text": "17 U.S.C. § 504(c)(1) (capping traditional copyright", "paragraph_id": "para_556" }, { "text": "statutory damages at $30,000 per work). We decline", "paragraph_id": "para_557" }, { "text": "plaintiffs’ invitation to transform run-of-the-mill copyright-", "paragraph_id": "para_558" }, { "text": "infringement claims into DMCA claims.", "paragraph_id": "para_559" }, { "text": "AFFIRMED.", "paragraph_id": "para_560" } ], "word_count": 4494, "cites": [ "556 U.S. 662", "550 U.S.\n544", "516 U.S.\n199", "504 U.S. 555", "573 U.S. 149", "497 U.S. 871", "461 U.S. 95", "593 U.S. 374", "629 F.3d 928", "273 F.3d 429", "979 F.3d 1209", "260 F.3d 997", "650 F.3d\n295", "833\nF.3d 1180", "163 F.4th 685", "952 F.3d 1051" ], "cited_by": [], "sha256": "e841339b7e524302e78aa3f762cdf266824feb47fb7b73f4958f79208f958ef5", "source_url": "https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/09/16/24-7700.pdf", "fetched_at": "2026-10-01T15:29:43.739+00:00", "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16", "risk_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16", "relations_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16", "changes": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes", "agent": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16", "verification": { "stored_sha256": "e841339b7e524302e78aa3f762cdf266824feb47fb7b73f4958f79208f958ef5", "recomputed_sha256": "e841339b7e524302e78aa3f762cdf266824feb47fb7b73f4958f79208f958ef5", "intact": true, "checked_at": "2026-10-17T17:48:16.324Z" } }, "hash": "sha256:c83cb52124efbfb7ca981db2d0d3233b9ec3e5b75f56eaa0a0d4cc4921c5bcf7", "version": "legal-2026-10-17", "expires": "2026-10-18T00:00:00.000Z", "dependency": { "index_version": "legal-2026-10-17+legal-2026-10-17+2026-10-17T17:42:33", "content_hash": "sha256:c83cb52124efbfb7ca981db2d0d3233b9ec3e5b75f56eaa0a0d4cc4921c5bcf7", "revalidate_after": "2026-10-17T18:48:16.509Z", "max_copy_age_seconds": 3600, "policy": "revalidate-required; attribution-preferred", "changelog": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency", "verify": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify", "stale_copy_invalid": true }, "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16", "follow": [ { "rel": "risk", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16" }, { "rel": "relations", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16" }, { "rel": "agent", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ca9-24-7700-2026-09-16" }, { "rel": "obligations", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain" }, { "rel": "changes", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us" } ], "disclaimer": "Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.", "content_notice": { "legal_advice": false, "nature": "Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.", "kinds": { "official_text": "Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted", "summary": "Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text", "classification": "Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer" }, "rule": "Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.", "report_error": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections", "ai_act_declaration": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration" }, "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering", "access_class": "public", "access_view": "public" }