-
Will Judge Lee certify a class action v. Google in AI suit? Hearing on Feb. 20. Judge Lee stays discovery pending her decision.
Read more: Will Judge Lee certify a class action v. Google in AI suit? Hearing on Feb. 20. Judge Lee stays discovery pending her decision.Wow. Judge Lee has stayed discovery in In re Google Generative AI Litigation, pending her decision on class certification. The hearing on class certification is tomorrow, February 20, 1 PM PDT in San Jose federal court. Not to read too much into it, but the stay of discovery could be a good sign for Google.…
-
Judge Lee instructs Plaintiffs in AI copyright suit v. Google to define the proposed classes ahead of Feb. 20 class certification hearing
Read more: Judge Lee instructs Plaintiffs in AI copyright suit v. Google to define the proposed classes ahead of Feb. 20 class certification hearingJudge Lee wants the plaintiffs in In re Google Generative AI Litigation to provide the precise definition of the classes they are seeking certification of. Apparently, in their briefing, the plaintiffs have shifted the definition over the course of the litigation. The hearing is Feb. 20, 2026, 1 PM PDT in San Jose.
-
The shadowy allegations v. Google asserted by book authors, now publishers. Did Google use shadow libraries or not — when it has its own Google Books database?
Read more: The shadowy allegations v. Google asserted by book authors, now publishers. Did Google use shadow libraries or not — when it has its own Google Books database?As part of their motion to intervene, book publishers Cengage Learning and Hachette Book’s proposed complaint against Google alleges “Google first illegally copied Plaintiffs’ and the Class’s copyrighted books—downloading them from pirated sources and extracting them from behind legitimate paywalls—to amass a massive corpus of source material.” The nature of Google’s alleged downloading appears to…
-
Cengage Learning, Inc., Hachette Book Group, Inc. ask to intervene in copyright suit v. Google.
Read more: Cengage Learning, Inc., Hachette Book Group, Inc. ask to intervene in copyright suit v. Google.Book publishers Cengage Learning, Inc. and Hachette Book Group, Inc. just filed a motion to intervene as plaintiffs in the existing lawsuit In re Google Generative AI, a case filed on July 11, 2023 that is now before Judge Eumi Lee. The book publishers are represented by lawyers from the law firms of Edelson PC…
-
Briefing on class certification complete in Google AI case. Huge issue for hearing on Feb. 4 before Judge Lee.
Read more: Briefing on class certification complete in Google AI case. Huge issue for hearing on Feb. 4 before Judge Lee.The Plaintiffs in the lawsuit against Google recently filed their reply in support of class certification. Outside of summary judgment, there’s no more important issue in the proposed class action lawsuits against AI companies than class certification. The hearing is set for February 4, before Judge Eumi Lee. Past briefing: (1) Plaintiffs Motion for Class…
-
Plaintiffs seek to exclude William Patry’s expert testimony on issues relevant to class certification in Google AI suit
Read more: Plaintiffs seek to exclude William Patry’s expert testimony on issues relevant to class certification in Google AI suitPlaintiffs are seeking to exclude the expert testimony of two experts proffered by Google: William Patry and Ryan Sullivan. Of course, as Plaintiffs say, “Patry formerly served as Google’s Senior Copyright Counsel for over 17 years and now works at Quinn Emanuel, where he represents other large technology companies in litigation involving the use of…
-
Magistrate Judge van Keulen denies Plaintiffs’ motion to “produce evidence sufficient to identify” Plaintiffs’ copyrighted works beyond the datasets already produced
Read more: Magistrate Judge van Keulen denies Plaintiffs’ motion to “produce evidence sufficient to identify” Plaintiffs’ copyrighted works beyond the datasets already producedIn In re Google Generative AI Litigation, Magistrate Judge van Keulen denied the Plaintiffs’ motion to compel Google to “produce evidence sufficient to identify, or simply identify: (1) all Named Plaintiffs’ copyrighted works in the datasets … used by Google to train the Models, and (2) all class member copyrighted works used for that purpose.”…
-
Runway seeks discovery from Sarah Andersen, Jingna Zhang from Google GenAI case
Read more: Runway seeks discovery from Sarah Andersen, Jingna Zhang from Google GenAI caseIn Andersen v. Stability AI, Runway is asking Magistrate Judge Cisneros to order Plaintiffs Sarah Andersen and Jingna Zhang to produce discovery from another lawsuit in which they are involved, In re Google Generative AI Litigation. DOWNLOAD THE DISCOVERY LETTER
-
Google files reply in support of sanctions in Gen AI suit
Read more: Google files reply in support of sanctions in Gen AI suitGoogle filed its reply to support its motion for sanctions against the Plaintiffs’ counsel in In re Google Generative AI Litigation. DOWNLOAD GOOGLE’S REPLY Related Stories Plaintiffs’ Opposition