Thomson Reuters has win The first Copyright of AI in the United States.
In 2020, the media and technology group has applied for an unprecedented application Copyright lawsuit Against legal start -up companies Ross Intelligence. In the complaint, Thomson Reuters announced the company who copied documents from Westlaw Legal Research Company. Today, a judge of the decision is beneficial for Thomson Reuters, realizing that the company's copyright was actually violated by the actions of Ross Intelligence.
No defense of Ross can keep water. I refused everything, he wrote the US Delwar district court Stephanos Bibas, in a summary sentence.
Thomson Reuters and Ross Intelligence did not immediately respond to comments.
The explosion of the generation has led to a series of legal fighting About how AI companies can use copyrighted documents, because many main AI tools have been developed by training copyright works including books, films, visual arts and visual arts and website. Right now, there are a few dozen cases currently rolling through the US Court system, as well as international challenges in China, Canada, England and other countries.
Notably, judge Bibas ruled in Thomson Reuters' favor on the question of fair use. The Reasonable use theory is A main composition About how AI companies are seeking to defend themselves to claims that they have used illegal copyrighted documents. The idea as a basis for fair use is sometimes the use of copyrighted works that are not allowed, for example, to create drawing works or in non -commercial research or news producing news. . When determining whether or not fair use is applied or not, the courts use the four factors test, consider the reason behind the work and the nature of the work (even if it is poetry, non -fictional , private letters, et khiera), the number of copyrighted jobs is used and how to use the impact on the market value of the original. Thomson Reuters won the two of the four factors, but Bibas described the quadrant to be the most important, and ruled that Ross means competing with Westlaw by developing a market replacement.
Even before this ruling, Ross Intelligence still felt the impact of the court battle: Starting a business Turn off In 2021, cite the cost of lawsuits. In contrast, many AI companies are still working in court, such as Openai and Google, equipped with financially for the legal battles that prolong the weather.
However, this ruling is a shot on AI companies, according to the Digital and Internet Law Professor of Cornell James Grimmelmann: If this decision is followed elsewhere, it is really bad for The general AI companies. Grimmelmann believes that Bibas's ruling shows that most of the laws that AI companies are citing to debate the fair use is unrelated.
Chris Mammen, a partner at Womble Bond Dickinson, who focuses on the Intellectual Property Law, agreed that this will complicate the arguments that use fairly AI companies, even though it can change. From plaintiffs to plaintiffs. He said, he put a finger on the scale to keep that fair use was not applied, he said.