Recent circuit court rulings in AI training disputes, such as the Ninth Circuit's September 2026 decisions rejecting DMCA claims against tools like GitHub Copilot while leaving core copyright issues open, have not yet produced the circuit splits or final judgments that typically prompt Supreme Court review. Major cases including New York Times v. OpenAI remain in district court with summary judgment motions pending, and appeals would require additional months or years to reach cert petitions. The Supreme Court's March 2026 denial of review in the related Thaler AI authorship matter further signals reluctance to intervene early on generative AI copyright questions. With no imminent appellate milestones or legislative triggers before year-end, traders see limited path for acceptance by 2027.
Polymarketデータを参照したAI生成の実験的な要約。これは取引アドバイスではなく、このマーケットの解決方法には一切関係ありません。 · 更新日はい
14% 確率
新規
新規
2026/12/31
はい
14% 確率
新規
新規
2026/12/31
This market will resolve to "Yes" if the Supreme Court of the United States grants certiorari in a case concerning artificial intelligence and United States copyright law by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A case qualifies if at least one of its claims or defenses, as described in the petition for certiorari or in the lower court's decision under review, concerns any of the following: (1) whether using copyrighted works to train, develop, or fine-tune an artificial intelligence model infringes copyright or is fair use; (2) whether outputs generated by an artificial intelligence model infringe copyright, or who is liable for such infringement; (3) whether works created in whole or in part by an artificial intelligence system are eligible for copyright protection, or who may be their author; or (4) any other claim under Title 17 of the United States Code, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, that arises from the training or development of an artificial intelligence model or from its outputs. An artificial intelligence model means any system that learns from data or generates content, including machine-learning and generative AI models such as large language, image, audio, and video models; the petition or decision does not need to use the words "artificial intelligence" or "AI". A grant limited to a procedural, jurisdictional, or remedial question in a qualifying case will count. A case in which an artificial intelligence developer is a party but no claim or defense concerns the matters listed above will not qualify.
Granting certiorari means an order granting a petition for a writ of certiorari, including certiorari before judgment. An order that grants certiorari, vacates the lower court's judgment, and remands without further review (a GVR order) will not qualify. Denials of certiorari, orders inviting the Solicitor General to file a brief, relisting of a petition, and rulings on emergency applications or stays will not qualify. A qualifying case does not need to be pending before the Court at the time this market is created, and a qualifying grant will resolve this market to "Yes" even if the case is later dismissed, settled, or otherwise removed from the Court's docket.
The grant must appear on the Supreme Court's official orders list or docket dated on or before December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET; the date of the Court's order governs, regardless of when reporting confirms it. The case does not need to be heard, scheduled, or decided by the deadline to qualify.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the Supreme Court of the United States (https://www.supremecourt.gov), including its orders lists and case dockets; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.Recent circuit court rulings in AI training disputes, such as the Ninth Circuit's September 2026 decisions rejecting DMCA claims against tools like GitHub Copilot while leaving core copyright issues open, have not yet produced the circuit splits or final judgments that typically prompt Supreme Court review. Major cases including New York Times v. OpenAI remain in district court with summary judgment motions pending, and appeals would require additional months or years to reach cert petitions. The Supreme Court's March 2026 denial of review in the related Thaler AI authorship matter further signals reluctance to intervene early on generative AI copyright questions. With no imminent appellate milestones or legislative triggers before year-end, traders see limited path for acceptance by 2027.
This market will resolve to "Yes" if the Supreme Court of the United States grants certiorari in a case concerning artificial intelligence and United States copyright law by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A case qualifies if at least one of its claims or defenses, as described in the petition for certiorari or in the lower court's decision under review, concerns any of the following: (1) whether using copyrighted works to train, develop, or fine-tune an artificial intelligence model infringes copyright or is fair use; (2) whether outputs generated by an artificial intelligence model infringe copyright, or who is liable for such infringement; (3) whether works created in whole or in part by an artificial intelligence system are eligible for copyright protection, or who may be their author; or (4) any other claim under Title 17 of the United States Code, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, that arises from the training or development of an artificial intelligence model or from its outputs. An artificial intelligence model means any system that learns from data or generates content, including machine-learning and generative AI models such as large language, image, audio, and video models; the petition or decision does not need to use the words "artificial intelligence" or "AI". A grant limited to a procedural, jurisdictional, or remedial question in a qualifying case will count. A case in which an artificial intelligence developer is a party but no claim or defense concerns the matters listed above will not qualify.
Granting certiorari means an order granting a petition for a writ of certiorari, including certiorari before judgment. An order that grants certiorari, vacates the lower court's judgment, and remands without further review (a GVR order) will not qualify. Denials of certiorari, orders inviting the Solicitor General to file a brief, relisting of a petition, and rulings on emergency applications or stays will not qualify. A qualifying case does not need to be pending before the Court at the time this market is created, and a qualifying grant will resolve this market to "Yes" even if the case is later dismissed, settled, or otherwise removed from the Court's docket.
The grant must appear on the Supreme Court's official orders list or docket dated on or before December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET; the date of the Court's order governs, regardless of when reporting confirms it. The case does not need to be heard, scheduled, or decided by the deadline to qualify.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the Supreme Court of the United States (https://www.supremecourt.gov), including its orders lists and case dockets; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
A case qualifies if at least one of its claims or defenses, as described in the petition for certiorari or in the lower court's decision under review, concerns any of the following: (1) whether using copyrighted works to train, develop, or fine-tune an artificial intelligence model infringes copyright or is fair use; (2) whether outputs generated by an artificial intelligence model infringe copyright, or who is liable for such infringement; (3) whether works created in whole or in part by an artificial intelligence system are eligible for copyright protection, or who may be their author; or (4) any other claim under Title 17 of the United States Code, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, that arises from the training or development of an artificial intelligence model or from its outputs. An artificial intelligence model means any system that learns from data or generates content, including machine-learning and generative AI models such as large language, image, audio, and video models; the petition or decision does not need to use the words "artificial intelligence" or "AI". A grant limited to a procedural, jurisdictional, or remedial question in a qualifying case will count. A case in which an artificial intelligence developer is a party but no claim or defense concerns the matters listed above will not qualify.
Granting certiorari means an order granting a petition for a writ of certiorari, including certiorari before judgment. An order that grants certiorari, vacates the lower court's judgment, and remands without further review (a GVR order) will not qualify. Denials of certiorari, orders inviting the Solicitor General to file a brief, relisting of a petition, and rulings on emergency applications or stays will not qualify. A qualifying case does not need to be pending before the Court at the time this market is created, and a qualifying grant will resolve this market to "Yes" even if the case is later dismissed, settled, or otherwise removed from the Court's docket.
The grant must appear on the Supreme Court's official orders list or docket dated on or before December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET; the date of the Court's order governs, regardless of when reporting confirms it. The case does not need to be heard, scheduled, or decided by the deadline to qualify.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the Supreme Court of the United States (https://www.supremecourt.gov), including its orders lists and case dockets; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
マーケット開始日： Sep 17, 2026, 8:03 PM ET
音量
$141終了日
2027/01/01マーケット開始日
Sep 17, 2026, 8:03 PM ETThis market will resolve to "Yes" if the Supreme Court of the United States grants certiorari in a case concerning artificial intelligence and United States copyright law by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A case qualifies if at least one of its claims or defenses, as described in the petition for certiorari or in the lower court's decision under review, concerns any of the following: (1) whether using copyrighted works to train, develop, or fine-tune an artificial intelligence model infringes copyright or is fair use; (2) whether outputs generated by an artificial intelligence model infringe copyright, or who is liable for such infringement; (3) whether works created in whole or in part by an artificial intelligence system are eligible for copyright protection, or who may be their author; or (4) any other claim under Title 17 of the United States Code, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, that arises from the training or development of an artificial intelligence model or from its outputs. An artificial intelligence model means any system that learns from data or generates content, including machine-learning and generative AI models such as large language, image, audio, and video models; the petition or decision does not need to use the words "artificial intelligence" or "AI". A grant limited to a procedural, jurisdictional, or remedial question in a qualifying case will count. A case in which an artificial intelligence developer is a party but no claim or defense concerns the matters listed above will not qualify.
Granting certiorari means an order granting a petition for a writ of certiorari, including certiorari before judgment. An order that grants certiorari, vacates the lower court's judgment, and remands without further review (a GVR order) will not qualify. Denials of certiorari, orders inviting the Solicitor General to file a brief, relisting of a petition, and rulings on emergency applications or stays will not qualify. A qualifying case does not need to be pending before the Court at the time this market is created, and a qualifying grant will resolve this market to "Yes" even if the case is later dismissed, settled, or otherwise removed from the Court's docket.
The grant must appear on the Supreme Court's official orders list or docket dated on or before December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET; the date of the Court's order governs, regardless of when reporting confirms it. The case does not need to be heard, scheduled, or decided by the deadline to qualify.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the Supreme Court of the United States (https://www.supremecourt.gov), including its orders lists and case dockets; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.Recent circuit court rulings in AI training disputes, such as the Ninth Circuit's September 2026 decisions rejecting DMCA claims against tools like GitHub Copilot while leaving core copyright issues open, have not yet produced the circuit splits or final judgments that typically prompt Supreme Court review. Major cases including New York Times v. OpenAI remain in district court with summary judgment motions pending, and appeals would require additional months or years to reach cert petitions. The Supreme Court's March 2026 denial of review in the related Thaler AI authorship matter further signals reluctance to intervene early on generative AI copyright questions. With no imminent appellate milestones or legislative triggers before year-end, traders see limited path for acceptance by 2027.
This market will resolve to "Yes" if the Supreme Court of the United States grants certiorari in a case concerning artificial intelligence and United States copyright law by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
A case qualifies if at least one of its claims or defenses, as described in the petition for certiorari or in the lower court's decision under review, concerns any of the following: (1) whether using copyrighted works to train, develop, or fine-tune an artificial intelligence model infringes copyright or is fair use; (2) whether outputs generated by an artificial intelligence model infringe copyright, or who is liable for such infringement; (3) whether works created in whole or in part by an artificial intelligence system are eligible for copyright protection, or who may be their author; or (4) any other claim under Title 17 of the United States Code, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, that arises from the training or development of an artificial intelligence model or from its outputs. An artificial intelligence model means any system that learns from data or generates content, including machine-learning and generative AI models such as large language, image, audio, and video models; the petition or decision does not need to use the words "artificial intelligence" or "AI". A grant limited to a procedural, jurisdictional, or remedial question in a qualifying case will count. A case in which an artificial intelligence developer is a party but no claim or defense concerns the matters listed above will not qualify.
Granting certiorari means an order granting a petition for a writ of certiorari, including certiorari before judgment. An order that grants certiorari, vacates the lower court's judgment, and remands without further review (a GVR order) will not qualify. Denials of certiorari, orders inviting the Solicitor General to file a brief, relisting of a petition, and rulings on emergency applications or stays will not qualify. A qualifying case does not need to be pending before the Court at the time this market is created, and a qualifying grant will resolve this market to "Yes" even if the case is later dismissed, settled, or otherwise removed from the Court's docket.
The grant must appear on the Supreme Court's official orders list or docket dated on or before December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET; the date of the Court's order governs, regardless of when reporting confirms it. The case does not need to be heard, scheduled, or decided by the deadline to qualify.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the Supreme Court of the United States (https://www.supremecourt.gov), including its orders lists and case dockets; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
A case qualifies if at least one of its claims or defenses, as described in the petition for certiorari or in the lower court's decision under review, concerns any of the following: (1) whether using copyrighted works to train, develop, or fine-tune an artificial intelligence model infringes copyright or is fair use; (2) whether outputs generated by an artificial intelligence model infringe copyright, or who is liable for such infringement; (3) whether works created in whole or in part by an artificial intelligence system are eligible for copyright protection, or who may be their author; or (4) any other claim under Title 17 of the United States Code, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, that arises from the training or development of an artificial intelligence model or from its outputs. An artificial intelligence model means any system that learns from data or generates content, including machine-learning and generative AI models such as large language, image, audio, and video models; the petition or decision does not need to use the words "artificial intelligence" or "AI". A grant limited to a procedural, jurisdictional, or remedial question in a qualifying case will count. A case in which an artificial intelligence developer is a party but no claim or defense concerns the matters listed above will not qualify.
Granting certiorari means an order granting a petition for a writ of certiorari, including certiorari before judgment. An order that grants certiorari, vacates the lower court's judgment, and remands without further review (a GVR order) will not qualify. Denials of certiorari, orders inviting the Solicitor General to file a brief, relisting of a petition, and rulings on emergency applications or stays will not qualify. A qualifying case does not need to be pending before the Court at the time this market is created, and a qualifying grant will resolve this market to "Yes" even if the case is later dismissed, settled, or otherwise removed from the Court's docket.
The grant must appear on the Supreme Court's official orders list or docket dated on or before December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET; the date of the Court's order governs, regardless of when reporting confirms it. The case does not need to be heard, scheduled, or decided by the deadline to qualify.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the Supreme Court of the United States (https://www.supremecourt.gov), including its orders lists and case dockets; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
音量
$141終了日
2027/01/01マーケット開始日
Sep 17, 2026, 8:03 PM ETRecent circuit court rulings in AI training disputes, such as the Ninth Circuit's September 2026 decisions rejecting DMCA claims against tools like GitHub Copilot while leaving core copyright issues open, have not yet produced the circuit splits or final judgments that typically prompt Supreme Court review. Major cases including New York Times v. OpenAI remain in district court with summary judgment motions pending, and appeals would require additional months or years to reach cert petitions. The Supreme Court's March 2026 denial of review in the related Thaler AI authorship matter further signals reluctance to intervene early on generative AI copyright questions. With no imminent appellate milestones or legislative triggers before year-end, traders see limited path for acceptance by 2027.
Polymarketデータを参照したAI生成の実験的な要約。これは取引アドバイスではなく、このマーケットの解決方法には一切関係ありません。 · 更新日
外部リンクに注意してください。
外部リンクに注意してください。
よくある質問