[REVISION HISTORY]

Expanding AI antitrust litigation and legal rulings

Updated 19 times since CLSTR started tracking revisions of this situation.

What changed

2026-09-23 20:24 UTC → 2026-09-27 21:43 UTC · added ~~removed~~

The legal conflict between Elon Musk’s companies and OpenAI has intensified. Following the dismissal of antitrust claims against Apple by X Corp and SpaceXAI, a federal judge in Texas, Mark Pittman, ordered the companies to disclose the specific details of their settlement with Apple. This order was granted after an emergency motion by OpenAI, which sought transparency regarding the terms that allowed Musk’s firms to drop allegations of collusion between Apple and OpenAI. OpenAI has since filed a motion in the same Texas federal court requesting the early dismissal of the antitrust lawsuit brought by Musk’s startup, xAI. OpenAI argues that the legal challenge is contradicted by recent securities disclosures from SpaceX, which it claims contain information “diametrically opposed” to the “catastrophic predictions” cited in the lawsuit. OpenAI also denied exercising monopoly power, noting that the integration of ChatGPT into Apple Intelligence experienced slow initial user growth and that Apple’s agreement is not exclusive. ~~The trial~~ In a new development, a class-action lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for ~~this matter is scheduled~~ the Northern District of California against Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, and SpaceX. The plaintiffs, who are paid subscribers to services including ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Grok, allege the companies entered into an illegal antitrust agreement to slow the pace of AI development. The suit stems from discussions regarding AI safety, specifically an essay by Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei titled ‘We Must Pace the Frontier’, which argued for ~~January.~~ slowing AI capability improvements to allow safety measures to catch up. While Amodei acknowledged such cooperation could raise antitrust concerns, plaintiffs argue the coordination constitutes an unlawful restraint on competition. Separately, the legal landscape for AI training continues to evolve. The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling that OpenAI and Microsoft are not liable under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act for using GitHub code for training, finding that the resulting outputs did not remove existing copyright management information.

Versions

Only revisions since CLSTR began indexing content versions appear here. Select a version to see what changed compared to the one before it.