-
Did Judge Bibas just issue order on infringement in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence two days before trial?
Read more: Did Judge Bibas just issue order on infringement in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence two days before trial?Just two days before trial, both parties in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence filed statements regarding an apparent decision by Judge Bibas, which is not yet available on the docket. In a sealed pleading, the defendant ROSS calls the decision “the court’s sua sponte summary judgment decision.” In its response, Thomson Reuters refers to it…
-
Status of all 29 copyright lawsuits v. AI: First trial begins Friday, Aug. 23, in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence
Read more: Status of all 29 copyright lawsuits v. AI: First trial begins Friday, Aug. 23, in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS IntelligenceHere’s the latest on all 29 copyright lawsuits against AI companies. New developments since last week’s report are indicated with an asterisk*. Case name Jurisdiction Judge Latest status Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH et al v. ROSS Intelligence Inc. D. Del. Bibas *TRIAL starts Friday, Aug. 23, 2024 with jury selection and opening statements _______________________________*[SEALED] MOTION for…
-
Thomson Reuters redacted reply regarding copyrightability of headnotes. Does Thomson unintentionally bolster the claim of authorship in AI generated works involving human input?
Read more: Thomson Reuters redacted reply regarding copyrightability of headnotes. Does Thomson unintentionally bolster the claim of authorship in AI generated works involving human input?The redacted version of Thomson Reuters’ reply to ROSS Intelligence’s list of Westlaw headnotes that it argued are not copyrightable is now available (see PDF below). Judge Bibas has already ruled that the jury should determine copyrightability of the headnotes, including their overall selection and arrangement in judicial decisions. But Thomson Reuters’ reply is fascinating…
-
Judge Bibas declines to rule on whether any headnotes are uncopyrightable, but allows ROSS to submit evidence of public benefit of generative AI at trial
Read more: Judge Bibas declines to rule on whether any headnotes are uncopyrightable, but allows ROSS to submit evidence of public benefit of generative AI at trialWith the first trial in an AI copyright lawsuit set only 2 weeks away (on Monday, Aug. 26), Judge Bibas issued some major pretrial rulings. Jury to determine copyrightability of headnotes First, he denied ROSS Intelligence’s request to have the court filter out allegedly uncopyrightable headnotes of West added to their case reports. Judge Bibas…
-
Judge Bibas gives partial win to ROSS Intelligence: orders them to identify West headnotes that are “verbatim quotations, or vary trivially from verbatim quotations, of judicial opinions”
Read more: Judge Bibas gives partial win to ROSS Intelligence: orders them to identify West headnotes that are “verbatim quotations, or vary trivially from verbatim quotations, of judicial opinions”Judge Bibas issued his ruling on ROSS Intelligence’s request for a filtration hearing. (For background, visit our prior analysis.) Although Judge Bibas didn’t grant the motion, he did allow ROSS Intelligence the opportunity to “submit a list of all headnotes it believes are verbatim quotations, or vary trivially from verbatim quotations, of judicial opinions by…
-
Thomson Reuters brief argues v. pretrial filtration hearing in AI lawsuit
Read more: Thomson Reuters brief argues v. pretrial filtration hearing in AI lawsuitThomson Reuters filed its brief arguing against ROSS Intelligence’s request that Judge Bibas conduct a pretrial filtration hearing to determine the (lack of) copyrightability of Westlaw’s headnotes and topics that it creates for legal decisions of the courts. In its brief, Thomson Reuters argues that no filtration hearing has ever occurred in the Third Circuit…
-
ROSS brief argues for filtration hearing conducted by Judge Bibas before trial to identify uncopyrightable elements
Read more: ROSS brief argues for filtration hearing conducted by Judge Bibas before trial to identify uncopyrightable elementsThe redacted version of ROSS Intelligence’s brief is now available. It argues that the court should conduct a pretrial filtration hearing on the copyrightability of Westlaw’s headnotes and legal topics. Headnotes are short summaries of points that Westlaw has drawn from a court decision. The legal topics are like topics in an index to a…
-
Judge Bibas agrees to consider whether to hold a pretrial filtration hearing on copyrightability of West works
Read more: Judge Bibas agrees to consider whether to hold a pretrial filtration hearing on copyrightability of West worksJudge Stephanos Bibas granted the parties’ request to allow briefing on whether the court should conduct a filtration hearing to determine if some elements of West’s works are not copyrightable as a matter of law. The defendant ROSS Intelligence supports a filtration hearing, but Thomson Reuters, the plaintiff, opposes it. The briefing schedule is: Entertaining…
-
Judge Bibas issues 1st ruling on how fair use applies in AI training, after Andy Warhol Foundation decision
Read more: Judge Bibas issues 1st ruling on how fair use applies in AI training, after Andy Warhol Foundation decisionJudge Stephanos Bibas, who is sitting by designation in the District of Delaware, issued the first ruling of a federal court that explains how fair use applies to AI training after the Supreme Court’s decision in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith. The case involves Ross’s training of AI allegedly based on copies of Westlaw headnotes.…