-
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…
-
ROSS Intelligence cofounder Jimoh Ovbiagele in new legal tech startup
Read more: ROSS Intelligence cofounder Jimoh Ovbiagele in new legal tech startupThe first trial in a copyright lawsuit against an AI company is Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence in the District of Delaware, scheduled for August 26, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. in Wilmington, Delaware, lasting five days. Jury selection on August 23, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. But what’s most unusual is that ROSS Intelligence closed its legal…