---
id: "question-appellate-resolution"
type: "open-question"
source_timestamps: ["¶7"]
tags: ["litigation", "supreme-court"]
related: ["concept-fair-use-divergence"]
resolutionPath: "Awaiting rulings from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and eventually the U.S. Supreme Court, on the appeals for Bartz v. Anthropic and Kadrey v. Meta."
sources: ["tail2"]
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-tail2"
originDay: 2
articleStem: "hbr-tail-126-genai-copyright"
sourceUrl: "https://hbr.org/2025/07/can-gen-ai-and-copyright-coexist"
sourceTitle: "Can Gen AI and Copyright Coexist?"
---
# How Will Appellate Courts Resolve the Fair Use Split?

**Open question.** How will appellate courts resolve the district-court split on AI-training fair use documented in [[concept-fair-use-divergence]]?

**Resolution path:** Awaiting rulings from the **Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals**, and likely ultimately the **U.S. Supreme Court**, on appeals arising from *Bartz v. Anthropic* ([[entity-anthropic-d2]]) and *Kadrey v. Meta* ([[entity-meta-d2]]). A downstream expert should watch how the courts reconcile the transformativeness emphasis (*Bartz*/[[quote-alsup-transformative]]) against the market-effect emphasis (*Kadrey*/[[quote-chhabria-competing]]) in light of *Warhol v. Goldsmith*.