View source for AI Law Wiki News for September 19, 2026

== Consumers challenge alleged AI-development coordination under antitrust law ==
Four consumers filed [[Buist v Anthropic PBC|Buist v. Anthropic PBC]] in the Northern District of California on September 18, 2026, alleging that [[Anthropic]], [[OpenAI|OpenAI OpCo LLC]], SpaceXAI LLC and Google LLC coordinated to slow improvement of competing AI subscriptions in violation of the Sherman Act.<ref name="buist-complaint">[https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ufb8Bg9RA9LmRKOvXSm9UbP9YITI9sDq/view Buist et al. v. Anthropic PBC et al., No. 3:26-cv-10693 (N.D. Cal.), ECF 1, filed September 18, 2026, pp. 1–7, 25–29.]</ref>

The proposed class action seeks treble damages and an injunction. It brings the [[United States policy on catastrophic AI risk#Pacing agreements, pauses, and bans|debate over coordinated AI development]] into antitrust litigation. Politico reports that the defendants did not immediately respond to requests for comment.<ref name="buist-complaint" /><ref name="buist-politico">[https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/anthropic-openai-spacexai-google-sued-010440086.html Tyler Katzenberger and Christine Mui, Politico via Yahoo News, “Anthropic, OpenAI, SpaceXAI, Google sued over call to ‘pace’ AI development,” September 18, 2026 (September 19 UTC).]</ref>


== Universal and Sony file second Suno copyright lawsuit ==
Universal and Sony label plaintiffs filed [[UMG Recordings Inc v Suno Inc (2026)|a second lawsuit against Suno]] on September 18, 2026, alleging unauthorized use of 60,202 sound recordings for AI training and circumvention of YouTube access controls. The Massachusetts complaint seeks damages and injunctive relief.<ref name="suno-2026-complaint">[https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/files/2026/09/26-cv-14275-Dkt.-1-Complaint.pdf UMG Recordings Inc. et al. v. Suno Inc., No. 1:26-cv-14275 (D. Mass.), ECF 1, filed September 18, 2026, pp. 1–2, 39–45.]</ref>

Music Business Worldwide reports that the action follows a decision limiting expansion of [[UMG Recordings Inc v Suno Inc|the earlier Suno case]] and also challenges the provenance of Suno’s v6 models.<ref name="suno-mbw">[https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/universal-and-sony-sue-suno-for-a-second-time-claiming-platforms-v6-models-are-the-fruit-of-the-same-poisoned-tree/ Music Business Worldwide, “Universal and Sony sue Suno for a second time,” September 18, 2026.]</ref>


== Bipartisan No FLOCK Act would restrict police use of automated plate readers ==
On September 15, 2026, Representatives Raja Krishnamoorthi and Michael Cloud announced the bipartisan [[NO FLOCK Act (119th Congress)|No Federal License-Plate Observation and Camera Keeping (No FLOCK) Act]]. The proposal would require states to limit automated license-plate readers to specified public-safety and toll-enforcement uses. After a two-fiscal-year implementation period, states without those restrictions would lose 10 percent of specified federal surface-transportation funding each fiscal year.<ref name="no-flock-sept15">[https://krishnamoorthi.house.gov/media/press-releases/krishnamoorthi-and-cloud-introduce-bipartisan-no-flock-act-crack-down-abuse Office of Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi, “Krishnamoorthi and Cloud Introduce Bipartisan No FLOCK Act to Crack Down on Abuse of License Plate Readers,” September 15, 2026.]</ref>

The official bill record identifies H.R. 10366 as introduced September 14 and referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.<ref name="no-flock-bill">[https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-119hr10366ih/html/BILLS-119hr10366ih.htm H.R. 10366, 119th Congress, introduced September 14, 2026, introductory record and sections 1–2 (GovInfo).]</ref>

Permitted uses would include toll enforcement, finding stolen vehicles or missing or endangered people, identifying vehicles registered to people with felony warrants, and investigating vehicles involved in felonies. The proposal addresses misuse of automated surveillance systems, including Flock Safety, amid privacy and civil-rights concerns.<ref name="no-flock-nextgov">[https://www.nextgov.com/artificial-intelligence/2026/09/tech-bills-week-monitoring-ais-use-under-section-702-preventing-abuse-automatic-license-plate-readers-and-more/416095/ Edward Graham, Nextgov/FCW, “Tech bills of the week,” September 18, 2026.]</ref>

== Healey seeks independent AI evaluations in Mass Wins bill ==
On September 18, 2026, Governor Maura Healey called for [[Massachusetts AI Law#Mass Wins AI safeguards proposal|Massachusetts’ pending Mass Wins economic development bill]] to require independent evaluations of the most powerful AI models and earlier reporting of serious safety incidents. She urged conference negotiators to strengthen the Senate’s AI provisions.<ref name="healey-mass-wins">[https://www.mass.gov/news/governor-healey-calls-for-strong-ai-safety-and-transparency-protections-in-mass-wins-act Massachusetts Governor’s Office, “Governor Healey Calls for Strong AI Safety and Transparency Protections in Mass Wins Act,” September 18, 2026.]</ref>

Her recommendations seek a path to independent reviews supported by safety standards and a qualified pool of evaluators. New Bedford Guide reported that her September 17 letter asked the conference committee to strengthen the pending package.<ref name="healey-nbg">[https://www.newbedfordguide.com/massachusetts-gov-healey-lawmakers-put-ai-guardrails-place-crisis-forces-hand/2026/09/18 New Bedford Guide, “Massachusetts Gov. Healey to Lawmakers: Put AI Guardrails In Place Before A Crisis Forces Our Hand,” September 18, 2026.]</ref>

== References ==
<references />

[[Category:News]]