A federal judge has expressed hesitation to dismiss a copyright claim brought by Vixen Media Group (VMG) against Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram. The case alleges that Meta used VMG's content without permission to train its artificial intelligence models.

Background on the Case

Meta Platforms initially filed a motion to dismiss last year, arguing that downloads tracked to company-owned IP addresses were for "personal use" and involved nearly 2,400 copyrighted works. However, VMG responded that Meta infringed on these 2,400 copyrighted works by using algorithmic, non-human download patterns.

According to Bloomberg Law, U.S. District Judge Eumi K. Lee of the Northern District of California expressed hesitation to dismiss the case this early in litigation, signaling she is likely to rule against Meta Platforms. The adult powerhouse claims more than $350 million in damages arising from this breach.

Similar Case Against Meta

A similar case, Kadrey v. Meta, was decided in June 2025 by a federal court in California. In that case, authors asserted copyright claims against Meta for unauthorized copying of their works for training. The court ruled in favor of Meta, holding on summary judgment that Meta's copying of books to train its AI was fair use.

However, the court noted that Meta won only on technical grounds, a matter of procedure, not on the merits of the law. The court explained how the market harm caused by Meta LLMs will almost certainly diminish the value of the authors' works and the copyright incentives to write new books. Judge Chhabria in essence found that using copyrighted works for training without a license is not fair use.

Implications for the Industry

The outcome of this case has significant implications for the adult entertainment industry, where content creators rely on intellectual property rights to protect their work. The decision by Judge Lee suggests that courts may be more willing to hold companies accountable for using copyrighted material without permission.

Key Facts

  • VMG claims over $350 million in damages arising from the alleged breach.
  • The case alleges that Meta used VMG's content without permission to train its artificial intelligence models.
  • Meta initially argued that downloads tracked to company-owned IP addresses were for "personal use" and involved nearly 2,400 copyrighted works.
  • VMG responded that Meta infringed on these 2,400 copyrighted works by using algorithmic, non-human download patterns.
  • Judge Eumi K. Lee expressed hesitation to dismiss the case this early in litigation.

No major ruling has yet been issued by Judge Lee in the VMG v. Meta case.