This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
11, 2025) examined three essential questions, 1) were the Westlaw headnotes and key number system taxonomy protected by copyright, 2) did Rosss copying of the headnotes to create legal memos used to train Rosss AI system infringe copyright, subject to the defense of fairuse, and 3) was Ross copying fairuse.…
2025 WL 89191 (S.D.N.Y. 14, 2025) This cases involves two videos, one involving Michael Jordan that someone posted to Twitter (seemingly without permission?), The plaintiff apparently owned the copyrights to both videos and sued XXL for copyrght infringement. Mediaite LLC, 2025 WL 89226 (S.D.N.Y. 2025 WL 208768 (W.D.
Many rulings missed the mark, but these five went the extra mile to secure their spots as the year’s worst copyright disasters. Hello and welcome to Copyright Latelys fifth annual countdown of the years biggest copyright misfires from coast to coast. FairUse Declawed. Only one way to find out. Netflix, Inc.
On February 11, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware became the first to rule on whether the use of copyrighted materials to train an AI system qualifies as copyright infringement. the court granted summary judgment on the plaintiffs infringement claim, and denied the defendants fair-use defense.
On February 11, 2025, Third Circuit visiting Judge Stephanos Bibas, sitting by designation on the U.S. This case represents one of the first substantial decisions addressing the issue of copyrightfair. By: Mintz
In the race to build the most capable LLM models, several tech companies sourced copyrighted content for use as training data, without obtaining permission from content owners. This case has a clear piracy angle, as Meta used libraries of pirated books as training material.
Ross Intelligenceon February 11, 2025, providing clarity on an often-asked question: is the utilization of copyrighted subject matter covered by the fairuse doctrine as an affirmative defense? District Court for the District of Delaware delivered a watershed ruling inThomson Reuters v.
Judge Alvin Hellerstein dismissed copyright infringement claims over a YouTube-hosted video embedded in the defendant’s article, finding that YouTube’s Terms of Service explicitly and unambiguously grant a sublicense that clearly extends to embedding. Townsquare Media : Sublicensing, FairUse, and De Minimis Use In Richardson v.
Considering that deepfakes are original, and are a result of human authors own intellectual creation, they are copyright-protected. In the United States, following the Feist publication, a work that has a modicrum of creativity is sufficient to benefit from copyright protection. WHERE SHOULD THE LINE BE DRAWN TO CURB MISUSE?
It’s been a busy two weeks for copyright and AI cases. March 18, 2025) This case involved the completely AI-generated work, “A Recent Entrance to Paradise”: The copyright applicant, Thaler, disclaimed any human involvement in the work’s creation. The district court ruled it wasn’t copyrightable.
Earlier this week, a federal judge rejected an AI startup's claim that usingcopyrighted material to train its AI system was permissible under the fairuse doctrine. 11, 2025)marks the first time a court has rejected a fairuse defense in this context. Ross Intelligence Inc., 1:20-CV-613-SB (D.
(This post has been co-authored with SpicyIP Intern Aditi Agrawal and Bharathwaj Ramakrishnan) Here is our recap of last weeks top IP developments including summary of the posts on taking stock of ANI vs OpenAI copyright litigation (Part I and II), and Machine Unlearning and the ANI vs OpenAI case. Drop a comment below to let us know.
Katfriend Paul England (Taylor Wessing) discussed the current state of Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) in the UK, questioning whether the system needs reform, by reviewing the recent English Court of Appeal decision in Merck Serono SA v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Mark s [2025] EWCA Civ 45 (28 January 2025).
Shamnad Basheer, it offers expert analysis of patents, copyrights, trademarks, geographical indications, and related policy issues. Theme: Literature, Journalism And IP Suggested Topics Balancing the interests of creators and the public in determining the extent of Copyright protection. Founded in 2005 by renowned legal scholar Prof.
Earlier this week, various rightsholder groups submitted their recommendations for the 2025 Special 301 Report. copyright protection standards. Various groups stressed the importance of copyright protection when it comes to new AI technologies. Not just for copyright holders, but also for American tech giants.
On February 11, 2025, the U.S. holding that the use of copyrighted works to train AI models does not fall under the fairuse exception. District Court for the District of Delaware granted Summary Judgment in favor of Thomson Reuters in Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH v. Ross Intelligence Inc. By: Benesch
However, this gives a grand legal question: who has the right to copyright AI-created works? This has to do with the application of copyright to works made through AI. Traditional Copyright Framework and Its Limitations Copyright law is fundamentally based on three principles: Authorship : The creator of a work owns the copyright.
On February 11, 2025, Judge Bibas of the Third Circuit, sitting by designation in the US District Court for the District of Delaware, issued a decision granting partial summary judgment to Thomson Reuters in the closely watched case of Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH v. Ross Intelligence Inc.
Copyright Office released Part 2 of its report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence on January 29, 2025. Part 2 focuses on the copyrightability of outputs created using generative AI. By: Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
carries significant implications for Generative AI and pending Copyright cases worldwide. On September 25, 2023, Judge Bibas rendered his initial opinion on summary judgment motions concerning direct infringement and fairuse. The dispute involved the use of 2,830 allegedly original Thomson Reuters headnotes.
The plaintiff sued the defendant (and others) for copyright infringement. Copyrightability The case sets up one of the longstanding open questions in copyright law: when are form contracts copyrightable, and when is sharing them infringing? Sadly, this case sidesteps that important copyrightability question.
Several copyright cases involving artificial intelligence are teed up for major rulings in 2025, with attorneys anxiously awaiting what courts have to say about fairuse, and at the Ninth Circuit, a photographer will argue for the reversal of a jury finding that a tattoo artist didn't infringe his photo of Miles Davis.
On February 11, 2025, Judge Stephanos Bibas issued an opinion in Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GMBH v. 1:20-cv-613, a dispute regarding copyright infringement allegations stemming from the use of copyrighted data from the Westlaw legal database used in the training of an AI search tool. Ross Intelligence Inc.,
[Thanks to Aditi, Khushi and Sudhanshu for the case summaries] Here is our recap of last weeks top IP developments including summary of the posts on the ANI vs OpenAI copyright case, CGPDTMs office being moved to Delhi, and exemption under Section 107A of the Patents Act. Drop a comment below to let us know. Other Posts New Age Office?
In September 2023, Judge Stephanos Bibassitting by designation in the District of Delawaredenied plaintiff Thomson Reuters motion for summary judgment on the issue of fairuse in a Generative AI (GenAI) copyright lawsuit. By: Husch Blackwell LLP
Ross Intelligence The recent US District Court opinion in Thomson Reuters (TR) v Ross Intelligence, which allowed TR’s motion of copyright infringement against Ross for its usage of TR’s headnotes, has caught the attention of genAI and copyright enthusiasts around the world. ANI-OpenAI litigation.
Invisible Narratives claims to own the copyrights and trademarks to the series. Next Level unlawfully submitted takedown notices to YouTube under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA Takedown Notices) which claimed that Season 25 of Skibidi Toilet contained copyright content owned by Next Level. ” PREACH!
Ross Intelligence The recent US District Court opinion in Thomson Reuters (TR) v Ross Intelligence, which allowed TR’s motion of copyright infringement against Ross for its usage of TR’s headnotes, has caught the attention of genAI and copyright enthusiasts around the world. ANI-OpenAI litigation.
In light of Amazon’s decision to disable the ‘Download or Transfer via USB’ feature from their Kindle devices, Arnav Kaman discusses DRMs/TPMs, the rights of the user, what users can do with their ebooks within the fairuse doctrine, and the future of ebooks in this guest post.
Career and Technical Education,Commercial Educational Materials,Medicine Joshua Potter February 24, 12:06 PM February 24, 12:06 PM In January of 2025, The Center for Phlebotomy Education Inc. Ironically, the video as shown in the photos still included the FBI copyright and piracy warning at the beginning. Stealing in Vein?
Do robust defences such as freedom of speech, right to livelihood, public interest, and fairuse offer absolute protection against infringements? Lemley and Peter Hendersons recent paper shifts the GenAI debate towards the terms of use attached to these models. DHC Directs CIC to Disclose a Ph.D 5,00,000 against the defendant.
The First prize goes to Pravertna Sulakshya , from Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab (Batch of 2025) for their essay titled, “ An IPR-Kajal for Dupes’ Evil Eye? The author walks the reader through the standard IP tools of patents, copyrights and trademarks, noting the gaps in them in the Indian context, vis-a-vis dupes.
by Dennis Crouch In a surprising decision today, Judge Stephanos Bibas ruled that ROSS Intelligence's use of Westlaw content to train its legal AI system constituted copyright infringement. 11, 2025). Most of these have favored the makers and users of AI over the owners of the IP (typically copyright holders). Ross Intel.
OpenAI’s vision for a fair AI ecosystem The ADAI mentions copyright only in passing, but it is fairly obvious that the desire to ‘deal’ with pending copyright infringement claims (largely in the US) lies at the core of this ambitious statement. OpenAI adds that new features will be added in the future.
The team names: Team 1: Khal Drogo Team 2: Khal Drone Go Team 3: Dragons Are Prior Art for Drones Team 4: Drone on Copyright (1879) Team 5: Red Flag Knowledge Wedding Team 6: A Team Has No Name Team 7: House TradeStarks Team 8: droner-morghulis Other team name ideas I liked: Aerial Stark, Dronecarys, and Vanna White-Walkers.
Harris claims that, in taking these actions, the University has not protected students' copyrights and fairuse rights. In 2022, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against the University which alleged, among other claims, copyright infringement. The University has yet to answer the 2025 Complaint. Did Mizzou Mizz-step?
A copyright claim appears. Welcome to the rollercoaster world of YouTube and copyright, where creativity collides with boundaries, and fairuse lines get blurred faster than a TikTok trend. COPY RIGHT BASICS So the good news: copyright laws were established to help protect creators. 1] Sounds fair, right?
Earlier this week, the IPKat announced the release of the long-awaited UK consultation on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and copyright. Although this consultation concentrates on copyright specifically, these bigger issues are also at stake. Now, we are pleased to host a further commentary by Angela Daly (University of Dundee).
In those circusmtances, copyright law is an especially attractive tool to the pugilists, with its strict liability standards, amorphous fairuse boundaries, high defense costs, and effectiveness of takedown notices. In the last month, two more copyright lawsuits over city council videos have triggered my alerts.
Photo by Etienne Girardet on Unsplash On 14 January 2025, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) heard oral arguments in the much-anticipated case C-590/23 Pelham II , where the German Federal Court submitted a request for preliminary ruling on the interpretation of pastiche. 3d 1257 (11th Cir.
Shein Technology LLC , 2025 WL 445187 (D.C.D.C. 9, 2025) Prior Posts on Section 512(f) * Copyright Battles Over City Council Videos * Record Label Sends Bogus Takedown Notice, Defeats 512(f) Claim AnywayWhite v. Day to Day Imports * Court Mistakenly Thinks Copyright Owners Have a Duty to Police InfringementSunny Factory v.
As we enter a new year, we would like to take this opportunity to pass on our best wishes for 2025 to all of our readers, as well as reflect on developments in copyright over the past year. Is Generative AI FairUse of Copyright Works? Such uses, they argue, constitute copyright infringement.
Images from here and here After ANI, Bollywood Music Labels Have a Faceoff with OpenAI By Anjali Tripathi As we already know, organisations around the world are now taking the initiative to sue Gen AI models, alleging copyright infringement for using their material to train their models. and now, there is a new development.
In 2025, forecasters predict humans will create 175 zetabytes of new data. What has changed is that creators are now directly expressing the need for consent prior to use. Under the Berne Convention and basically every national law, copying requires explicit consent from the rights owner unless a copyright exception applies.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content