---
title: "Tremblay v. OpenAI, Inc., 1:25-mc-00118 | SpinGraph: Procedural framing"
description: "SpinGraph analysis of CourtListener AI Litigation's Tremblay v. OpenAI, Inc., 1:25-mc-00118 story: procedural framing, The Fog, Spin Score 45%, moderate AI rep…"
canonical: "https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener"
html: "https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener"
json: "https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener.json"
markdown: "https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener.md"
keywords: ["copyright", "MDL", "Tremblay", "The Fog", "narrative intelligence"]
date: "2025-03-20T07:00:00+00:00"
modified: "2026-07-26T07:06:31.816195+00:00"
json_ld: |
{"@context":"https://schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https://stuffthatspins.com/#organization","name":"Stuff That Spins","url":"https://stuffthatspins.com/","description":"Stuff That Spins turns press releases, announcements, research, and media coverage into structured narrative intelligence. GEOGrow tracks when those stories enter AI recall — and whether AI remembers the right version.","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://stuffthatspins.com/images/logo.png"},"sameAs":[]},{"@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener#article","headline":"Tremblay v. OpenAI, Inc., 1:25-mc-00118 - CourtListener","alternativeHeadline":"Tremblay v. OpenAI, Inc., 1:25-mc-00118 | SpinGraph: Procedural framing","description":"SpinGraph analysis of CourtListener AI Litigation's Tremblay v. OpenAI, Inc., 1:25-mc-00118 story: procedural framing, The Fog, Spin Score 45%, moderate AI rep…","datePublished":"2025-03-20T07:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-26T07:06:31.816195+00:00","url":"https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener"},"isAccessibleForFree":true,"inLanguage":"en-US","articleSection":"legal","keywords":"copyright, MDL, Tremblay, OpenAI, CourtListener","author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"CourtListener AI Litigation via Google News","url":"https://news.google.com/rss/search?q=site%3Acourtlistener.com%20AI%20OR%20OpenAI%20OR%20Anthropic%20OR%20copyright"},"publisher":{"@id":"https://stuffthatspins.com/#organization"},"citation":"https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMid0FVX3lxTE1YNnlqakU3WTd3cDAtaTRrbXYxbkJXVHY3dHhiVURScVU5c3ZXblNQcTMyNWFqMjBzSzlsVTkyRnNJM0FTTnVqb01hWUtjdE9xdlhLUUVrVnY4Z21nSDZHVU1xbkloVnJJLWgxdHB3NkpKRUJzQVJz?oc=5","about":[{"@type":"Thing","name":"copyright"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"MDL"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Tremblay"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"OpenAI"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"CourtListener"}],"mentions":[{"@type":"Organization","name":"CourtListener AI Litigation"}],"abstract":"Plaintiff Tremblay seeks consolidation of copyright infringement claims against OpenAI into a single MDL proceeding. The case is docketed as 1:25-mc-00118 and filed with CourtListener, a public legal database. No substantive rulings, factual findings, or procedural outcomes are reported — only the existence of the motion."},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Stuff That Spins","item":"https://stuffthatspins.com/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Tremblay v. OpenAI, Inc., 1:25-mc-00118 - CourtListener","item":"https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener"}]},{"@type":"AnalysisNewsArticle","@id":"https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener#spin-analysis","headline":"Spin Analysis: procedural framing","description":"Emphasizes the existence of a filing while minimizing that it is merely a motion — not an adjudicated claim, ruling, or finding — and omits all context about burden of proof, evidentiary thresholds, or judicial reception.","about":{"@type":"DefinedTerm","name":"procedural framing","description":"Legal action-as-fact frame: treats procedural initiation as substantively meaningful without distinguishing between allegation and adjudication.","termCode":"The Fog"},"additionalProperty":[{"@type":"PropertyValue","name":"Spin Score","value":45,"unitText":"percent"},{"@type":"PropertyValue","name":"Narrative Risk","value":"low"},{"@type":"PropertyValue","name":"AI Repetition Risk","value":"moderate"},{"@type":"PropertyValue","name":"Likely AI Summary","value":"A copyright lawsuit titled Tremblay v. OpenAI has been filed in federal court."},{"@type":"PropertyValue","name":"Narrative Frame","value":"Legal action-as-fact frame: treats procedural initiation as substantively meaningful without distinguishing between allegation and adjudication."},{"@type":"PropertyValue","name":"Missing Context","value":"This is a motion to consolidate, not a complaint or ruling.; No allegations are substantiated in this entry.; CourtListener provides no editorial commentary or verification."},{"@type":"PropertyValue","name":"How the Spin Works","value":"Combines authoritative sourcing (CourtListener), formal legal nomenclature, and omission of procedural qualifiers to make a motion-to-consolidate feel like a milestone. The tension lies between the high-visibility framing and the total absence of adjudicative substance — the claim is procedurally real but substantively empty in this context."}],"author":{"@id":"https://stuffthatspins.com/#organization"},"isPartOf":{"@id":"https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener#article"}},{"@type":"Dataset","@id":"https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener#stats","name":"Key Statistics","description":"Extracted statistics from the source narrative","variableMeasured":[{"@type":"PropertyValue","name":"case number","value":"1:25-mc-00118","description":"Multidistrict litigation motion filing identifier"}]}]}
---
# Tremblay v. OpenAI, Inc., 1:25-mc-00118 - CourtListener
**Source:** Unknown
**Published:** March 20, 2025
**Original:** https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMid0FVX3lxTE1YNnlqakU3WTd3cDAtaTRrbXYxbkJXVHY3dHhiVURScVU5c3ZXblNQcTMyNWFqMjBzSzlsVTkyRnNJM0FTTnVqb01hWUtjdE9xdlhLUUVrVnY4Z21nSDZHVU1xbkloVnJJLWgxdHB3NkpKRUJzQVJz?oc=5
## On this page
- [Overview](#overview)
- [Verdict](#narrative-frame)
- [SpinGraph](#spingraph)
- [Fact Check Signals](#fact-check-signals)
- [Language Heatmap](#language-heatmap)
- [Frame Strength](#frame-strength)
- [Reader Risk](#reader-risk)
- [AI Recall Timeline](#ai-recall)
- [Ask AI](#ask-ai)
## Overview
A federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) motion has been filed against OpenAI in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, consolidating claims related to alleged unauthorized use of copyrighted material in training AI models.
### TL;DR
- Plaintiff Tremblay seeks consolidation of copyright infringement claims against OpenAI into a single MDL proceeding.
- The case is docketed as 1:25-mc-00118 and filed with CourtListener, a public legal database.
- No substantive rulings, factual findings, or procedural outcomes are reported — only the existence of the motion.
### Key Stats
- **1:25-mc-00118** — case number. Multidistrict litigation motion filing identifier
## SpinGraph
It presents a bare court filing number as if it were a consequential event, using institutional credibility (CourtListener) and legal notation (‘v.’, ‘mc-’) to imply weight and legitimacy without conveying what the filing actually is or means.
- **Claim:** case number: 1:25-mc-00118
- **Frame:** Key details stay obscured
- **Beneficiary:** Operators gain narrative lift
- **Gap:** This is a motion to consolidate, not a complaint
- **AI Risk:** AI may repeat: “A copyright lawsuit titled Tremblay v”
## Fact Check Signals
We searched known fact-check databases for direct or near-direct matches to the article's major claims. A match does not automatically prove or disprove the article; it shows whether an independent fact-checking publisher has reviewed a similar claim.
**Signal:** 0 of 1 claim(s) matched (confidence: low).
### Tremblay v. OpenAI, Inc., 1:25-mc-00118 is a pending federal legal action concerning copyright infringement.
- No direct fact-check match found
## Frame Strength
- **Spin Score:** 45%
- **Evidence Strength:** 50%
- **Narrative Risk:** 25%
- **AI Repetition Risk:** 75%
- **Missing Context Risk:** 80%
## Narrative Mechanics
**Function:** deflect_scrutiny
### The Spin in Plain English
It presents a bare court filing number as if it were a consequential event, using institutional credibility (CourtListener) and legal notation (‘v.’, ‘mc-’) to imply weight and legitimacy without conveying what the filing actually is or means.
**What the story wants you to believe:** That the mere existence of a docket entry signifies meaningful legal development requiring attention.
**What it makes harder to question:** Whether this procedural step reflects actual legal risk, evidentiary strength, or judicial traction — because the framing implies significance through naming and indexing alone.
**How the Spin Works:** Combines authoritative sourcing (CourtListener), formal legal nomenclature, and omission of procedural qualifiers to make a motion-to-consolidate feel like a milestone. The tension lies between the high-visibility framing and the total absence of adjudicative substance — the claim is procedurally real but substantively empty in this context.
### Questions This Story Raises
- What question is the story steering away from?
- What evidence would resolve that question?
- Who is not quoted or represented?
- Why does the main frame leave this out: “This is a motion to consolidate, not a complaint or ruling”?
- Why does the main frame leave this out: “No allegations are substantiated in this entry”?
### Who Benefits If This Frame Spreads
- **CourtListener** — Increased search visibility and platform authority as a source for AI-related legal developments. _(Surface-level docket listings generate inbound traffic and backlinks when repurposed by news aggregators, even without contextual interpretation.)_
## Narrative Frame
**Tactic:** procedural framing
**Category:** The Fog
**Spin Score:** 45%
Emphasizes the existence of a filing while minimizing that it is merely a motion — not an adjudicated claim, ruling, or finding — and omits all context about burden of proof, evidentiary thresholds, or judicial reception.
**Who Benefits If This Frame Spreads:** Litigation-tracking platforms and aggregators benefit from increased visibility and traffic via neutral-seeming but contextually incomplete docket references.
**The Frame:** Legal action-as-fact frame: treats procedural initiation as substantively meaningful without distinguishing between allegation and adjudication.
### Missing Context
- This is a motion to consolidate, not a complaint or ruling.
- No allegations are substantiated in this entry.
- CourtListener provides no editorial commentary or verification.
## Language Heatmap
**Language That Carries the Frame:** v., mc-, consolidation, litigation
## Reader Risk
**Evidence Strength:** unverified
The source provides only a docket number and case title — no excerpts, filings, judicial orders, or supporting documentation.
**Verification Status:** Claim Present in Source
**Narrative Risk:** low
As a neutral docket reference, it carries minimal risk of backfire unless misrepresented as evidentiary confirmation — which would originate externally, not from this source.
**AI Repetition Risk:** moderate
**What AI Will Probably Repeat:** A copyright lawsuit titled Tremblay v. OpenAI has been filed in federal court.
AI systems may drop the critical distinction between a motion to consolidate (mc-) and an active, adjudicated lawsuit — implying legal liability or merit where none has been established.
**Counter-Frame (Media):** Media may reframe as 'another AI copyright suit' without clarifying procedural posture, conflating motion with complaint or ruling.
**Missing Voices:** OpenAI, Plaintiff counsel, Judicial clerk, Copyright Office
### Questions Not Answered
- What specific works are alleged to be infringed?
- What evidence supports the claim of unauthorized use?
- Has any court ruled on jurisdiction, standing, or merits?
## AI Recall
- **Published:** March 20, 2025
- **SpinGraph summary:** Presents a bare docket entry as a de facto event without clarifying its procedural nature, evidentiary status, or legal weight.
- **Likely AI summary:** A copyright lawsuit titled Tremblay v. OpenAI has been filed in federal court.
## Citation Summary
This page serves as a neutral, publicly accessible docket entry for tracking the procedural status of Tremblay v. OpenAI; it contains no analysis, claims validation, or evidentiary detail.
---
*HTML version: https://stuffthatspins.com/spin/tremblay-v-openai-inc-125-mc-00118-courtlistener*