On Tuesday, a federal judge ruled that Thomson Reuters, parent company of Reuters, was in favor of a lawsuit against legal AI developer Loss Intelligence.
US Circuit Judge Stefanos Vivas said he was revising his opinion on the 2023 summary judgment, court documents show.
The ruling comes from a May 2020 lawsuit, when Thomson Reuters, San Francisso-based Los Intelligence, trains AI using data obtained from Michigan’s jetase solutions. accused of illegally copying the content from.
Since the launch of ChatGPT in 2022, media outlets, artists and authors have expressed concern that content is being used to train AI models.
Many creators of Game of Thrones, including George RR Martin, John Grisham and Michael Connelly, have sued the developers and accused them of using the work without permission or compensation. In December 2023, the New York Times sued Openai, claiming that the article was used to train ChatGpt.
“In 2023’s opinion, we rejected a summary judgment on fair use,” wrote Judge Vivas. “But with new information and understanding, I will vacate the opinion that addresses the section of the order and the accompanying opinions on fair use. As fair use is a positive defense, Ross is responsible for the burden of proof. ”
Judge Bibas explained that after Ross was denied a license to use Westlaw content, he obtained training data for Legease, an outsourced service provider that provides a collection of “bulk memos” or legal queries and answers.
“Regalease sold Ross about 25,000 bulk memos, which Ross used to train AI search tools,” writes Bibas. In other words, Ross used bulk memo to build competing products. It was built from Westlaw Headnotes. When Thomson Reuters discovered it, it sued Ross for copyright infringement. ”
According to Judge Bibas, Legalease provided a guide explaining how to use Westlaw Headnotes to create questions and answers. The guide told the user not to copy and paste the head note directly.
“The parties agree that Legease has access to Westlaw and use it to create a bulk memo,” wrote Judge Bibas. “Of course, access alone is not evidence. However, if the question in the bulk memo is more like the principal than the original judicial opinion, it strongly suggests a real copy.”
Judge Bibas discovered that Ross Intelligence was infringed on 2,243 head notes, but the remaining de facto question is whether some of the copyright has expired. He also ruled that he would deny Loss Intelligence’s defenses (innocent infringement, copyright misuse, mergers, faire scenes, etc.).
“Smartman knows when he is right. A smart person knows he is wrong,” wrote Judge Vivas. “Wisdom doesn’t always find me, so I try to accept it when it is.
Edited by Sebastian Sinclair
Discover more from Earlybirds Invest
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
