Thomson Reuters has achieved a significant victory in the first major AI copyright case in the U.S. against the legal AI startup, Ross Intelligence. The lawsuit centered on allegations that Ross used copyrighted materials from Thomson Reuters' Westlaw service without permission. U.S. District Court Judge Stephanos Bibas ruled in favor of Thomson Reuters, concluding that Ross's defenses were not valid. This ruling has broader implications as it could influence ongoing discussions about AI's use of copyrighted materials, particularly amidst a growing number of similar lawsuits globally, highlighting the contentious nature of AI in relation to copyright laws.
None of Ross's possible defenses holds water. I reject them all,” wrote US District Court of Delaware Judge Stephanos Bibas, in a summary judgment.
The generative AI boom has led to a spate of additional legal fights about how AI companies can use copyrighted material, as many major AI tools were developed by training on copyrighted works including books, films, visual artwork, and websites.
Notably, Judge Bibas ruled in Thomson Reuters' favor on the question of fair use. The fair use doctrine is a key component of how AI companies are seeking to defend themselves against claims that they used copyrighted materials illegally.
When determining whether fair use applies, courts use a four-factor test, looking at the reason behind the work, the nature of the work, the amount of copyrighted work used, and how the use impacts the market value of the original.
Collection
[
|
...
]