Public Beta · Not legal advice
← Interactive map

Brazil · BR-002

Spitz Park Aventuras Ltda v ECAD

PRIMA FACIETribunal de Justica de Santa CatarinaAgravo de Instrumento 5032376-37.2025.8.24.0000Interlocutory appellate judgment
CopyrightabilityAI MusicPublic PerformanceSubstantial SimilarityEvidence / Burden of Proof

Key holding or allegation

The appellate court refused to suspend royalties, stressing the factual/legal complexity and possible reliance on protected works; lack of an identifiable human author did not itself establish that charges were inapplicable.

Why it matters

Direct AI-music case separating the question of AI authorship from possible use of protected source material and public-performance liability.

Facts

Theme park argued that public-performance royalties should not apply because music played at the venue was said to be AI-generated.

Issues before the court

Whether alleged AI generation eliminated royalty liability and whether interim relief suspending ECAD charges was warranted.

What the court did not decide

The court did not hold that purely AI-generated music is necessarily copyrightable or finally determine infringement/royalty liability.

Procedural timeline

2025-07-31

Tribunal de Justica de Santa Catarina
Interlocutory appellate judgment: Court refused to suspend ECAD royalties merely because the music was asserted to be AI-generated, noting factual complexity and possible reliance on protected works.

PRIMA FACIE