Jump to content

SEIU Pension Plan Master Trust v Narayen

From AI Law Wiki

AI-generated text. This page was generated using artificial intelligence.

Case Information
Case name In re Adobe Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation (SEIU Pension Plan Master Trust v. Narayen)[1]
Court U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California[2]
Docket Lead 3:26-cv-03521-CRB; consolidated with 5:26-cv-05882[1]
Filed April 24, 2026[2]
Judge(s) Charles R. Breyer[1]
Plaintiffs SEIU Pension Plan Master Trust; Michael Hirschberger; James Peterson; Mitchell Small (derivatively on behalf of Adobe)[1]
Defendants Shantanu Narayen and other named Adobe officers/directors; Adobe Inc. (nominal defendant)[2]
Case type Shareholder derivative civil action[2]
Claims / issues Alleged fiduciary breaches and related claims arising from Adobe’s AI training practices[2]
Status August 25, 2026: derivative actions consolidated; lead counsel appointed; consolidated complaint due within 30 days. Later developments have not been verified.[1]

SEIU Pension Plan Master Trust v. Narayen is a shareholder derivative action filed on April 24, 2026 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging that Adobe Inc. CEO Shantanu Narayen and other Adobe officers and directors breached their fiduciary duties by adopting and implementing an unlawful business strategy of training Adobe's artificial intelligence services on copyrighted works without authorization.[3]


August 25, 2026: derivative actions consolidated; lead counsel appointed; consolidated complaint due within 30 days. Later developments have not been verified.[1]

Allegations

The complaint alleges that Adobe executives breached their fiduciary duties by adopting and implementing an "unlawful business strategy" whereby Adobe used copyrighted material to develop its AI services, exposing the company to substantial copyright infringement liability.[3]

The derivative action is brought by the SEIU Pension Plan Master Trust, a shareholder of Adobe, on behalf of Adobe itself against its own officers and directors. Under Delaware corporate law (Adobe is incorporated in Delaware), shareholders may bring derivative suits when they allege that corporate management has harmed the corporation through breaches of fiduciary duty.[3]

Significance

This is the first shareholder derivative action against a public company based on its activity in training AI models using copyrighted works. It represents a novel legal theory that AI training on copyrighted material may constitute a breach of fiduciary duty by corporate officers, creating personal liability exposure for directors and executives beyond the company's direct copyright infringement risk.[3]

The case potentially opens a new category of AI-related litigation alongside direct copyright infringement suits, and may influence corporate governance practices around AI training data acquisition.

See Also

References