Apple AI Copyright Case Has Firms Vying to Lead Class Counsel

Three groups of law firms are fighting for the top spot representing writers in a recently consolidated proposed class action against Apple Inc. alleging it used a database containing pirated books to train its AI models.

Counsel that brought each of three originally separate class actions against Apple filed responses Dec. 5 to each others’ motions to be appointed interim lead class counsel in the US District Court for the Northern District of California.

Susman Godfrey LLP, Keller Rohrback LLP, and Butterick Law PC filed the first of the three lawsuits consolidated against Apple representing authors Grady Hendrix and Jennifer Roberson. Susman Godfrey told the court it has an “unmatched” AI litigation track record, pointing to its work defeating motions to dismiss and strike in a consolidated class action against OpenAI Inc. and representing plaintiffs in a class action against Anthropic that settled for $1.5 billion.

“None of the competing leadership teams have, in a generative-AI case, successfully certified a class, defeated a fair-use defense at summary judgment, or reached a settlement,” Susman wrote.

Meanwhile, Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy LLP and Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP argued their complaint, filed on behalf of named plaintiff Tasha Alexander, was the strongest. The two firms are the “best balance between providing a rising star in the class action bar” and appointing an “established hand with decades of expertise in intellectual property,” they wrote.

Joseph Saveri Law Firm LLP said it’s open to an “inclusive joint leadership structure,” with one law firm from each of the three proposed class actions acting as interim lead counsel. If that proposal isn’t accepted, the firm insisted it should take the lead counsel spot, pointing to its record as one of the first firms to file cases on behalf authors against AI companies.

Saveri Law said it filed the second, more nuanced complaint for professors Susana Martinez-Conde and Stephen L. Macknik. It was the only complaint to allege that each unauthorized copy of the authors’ work and Apple’s derivative uses of it constituted a separate infringement, the firm said.

“The attention to detail in crafting the Martinez-Conde Complaint exemplifies the careful lawyering and experience that Mr. Young and JSLF will employ as Interim Class Counsel,” it wrote.

A hearing on the motions is set for Dec. 30.

The suits against Apple, all accusing it of downloading books from pirate libraries, were consolidated last month.

The case is Hendrix v. Apple Inc., N.D. Cal., No. 4:25-cv-7558, responses filed 12/5/25.