Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart
Mini Article – Volume 25, Issue 5
Share on Social
AI Pushes Copyright Limits—Court Pushes Back
By Kristyn Webb
Artificial Intelligence lawsuits have been grabbing headlines for a few years now. One of the most common legal challenges is whether AI should be free to train on data that is protected by copyright and owned by third parties without first obtaining permission. Is this fair use?
Briefly, in US Copyright Law, fair use is a legal doctrine that allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission for purposes such as criticism, commentary, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. Luckily, we now have an answer from the U.S. District Court in Delaware: using copyrighted works to train AI models without permission is not fair use.
Thomson Reuters owns the legal research database Westlaw, which includes headnotes (editorial summaries written by legal experts). These headnotes help attorneys and judges quickly understand case rulings. ROSS Intelligence, an AI-driven legal research startup, aimed to create a competitor to Westlaw.
In 2020, Thomson Reuters sued ROSS, alleging that ROSS used headnotes without permission to train its AI. ROSS initially tried to license Westlaw’s data but was denied. Instead, it used “Bulk Memos”—documents prepared by a third party that were derived from Westlaw’s headnotes. ROSS’s product, when prompted with a legal question, would produce a judicial opinion—but not a Westlaw headnote. ROSS was using the headnotes to train the AI model but was not reproducing the headnotes to the end user. ROSS argued this was fair use, but Thomson Reuters disagreed, leading to a legal battle.
In 2023, the court had initially determined that fair use was a matter for the jury to determine and denied early dismissal of the case before trial. Then, after further arguments and briefing, and after personally reviewing thousands of headnotes, the judge reversed this portion of the earlier ruling and instead held that this was decidedly not a case of fair use. The judge reasoned that because the headnotes were being used to train AI and create a tool to compete directly with Thomson Reuters there was no innovative or transformative use of the copyrighted headnotes. Moreover, Thompson Reuters may have been able to license its headnotes to other companies looking to train AI models or even use the headnotes to develop its own AI tools. Thus, no fair use.
The judge further noted that ROSS’s product was not a generative-AI model, meaning that the ROSS product was not creating new content, but outputting existing judicial opinions. However, this case will likely prove to be a bellwether for other cases involving generative AI.
The line between fair use and infringement will likely be tested further as AI evolves and these lawsuits make their way through the court system. For now, this case is a warning to AI developers: borrowing without a license can be costly.
Kristyn Webb is an attorney with Fishman Stewart’s Copyright Practice Group, and holds a master’s degree in copyright law from King’s College London.
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
The FIFA World Cup is global football (or soccer) at its highest level. It is, however, also one of the most carefully crafted displays of intellectual property (IP) in the world.
Trademark owners are often cast as villains when they send cease-and-desist letters. But in trademark law, failing to enforce rights can sometimes create bigger problems than enforcing them.
Women’s sports are having a moment, and not a small one. And right alongside that rise: the business of women’s sports is heating up, including some surprisingly dramatic trademark battles.
The idea that someone might “own” a piece of DNA raises a slightly uncomfortable question: can you really patent something that exists inside all of us?
Forbes reported that more than 1.5 million bots on an AI agent-driven social network appear to have created a new religion for themselves, the Church of Molt, with congregants adopting the name of “Crustafarians.”
Every March, college basketball players get an opportunity to become household sensations overnight. In today’s NIL (Name Image Likeness) era, that moment can be a once-in-a-lifetime business opportunity.
Behind the shamrocks and celebrations of St. Patrick's Day lies a surprisingly rich intersection with intellectual property.
Last week, PEI Licensing, LLC., the owner of the ORIGINAL PENGUIN brand (also known simply as PENGUIN) sued Pudgy Penguins Inc. in federal court in Florida over their respective penguin trademarks.
Matthew McConaughey recently obtained several trademark registrations with the U.S. Trademark Office in an effort to digitally capture and protect his entire persona.
Patents enable others to learn from, build upon, and improve the disclosed invention effectively. However, some have questioned whether they still work in today’s artificial intelligence (AI) landscape.
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
