Thompson Reuters wins the first case of post -artificial publication in the United States

Tomson Reuters beat The first issue of publishing rights from artificial intelligence in the United States.

In 2020, the group of media and technology presented unprecedented Amnesty International is a lawsuit for copyright Against the start of artificial intelligence intelligence. In the complaint, Thompson Reuters claimed that the artificial intelligence company is reproduced from the Westlaw Legal Research Company. Today, a judge ruled in favor of Thompson Reuters, and found that the company’s copyright had already violated Russian intelligence actions.

“None of the potential Russian defenses carry water. The Dilayer County Court wrote Stefanos Pipas,” I refuse them all, “in a brief judgment.

Thompson Reuters and Russians did not immediately respond to the comment requests.

The Break of Wooing AI led to an additional chain Legal battles On how artificial intelligence companies use copyright -protected materials, many artificial intelligence tools have been developed through training in copyright, including books, movies, visual artworks and websites. Currently, there are several dozens of lawsuits that are currently going through the US court system, as well as international challenges in China, Canada, the United Kingdom and other countries.

It is worth noting that Judge Pepas ruled in favor of Thompson Reuters on the issue of fair use. the The doctrine of just use he The key component On how artificial intelligence companies seek to defend themselves against allegations that they used illegal copyright materials. The idea that supports fair use is that sometimes it is legally advisable to use copyright works without permission – for example, to create satirical simulation works, in non -commercial research or news production. When determining whether the fair use applies, the courts use a four -factor test, consider the reason behind the work, the nature of the work (whether it is poetry, stories, private messages, etc.), the amount of the operated work used, and how use affects the value The market for the original. Thomson Reuters prevailed over two of the four factors, but Pipas described the fourth as the most important, and he spent that Ross “was aiming to compete with Westlu by developing an alternative in the market.”

Even before this ruling, Ross Intelligence felt already with the impact of the court’s battle: startup close In 2021, quoting the cost of litigation. In contrast, many artificial intelligence companies are still wandering in court, such as Openai and Google, financially equipped for the lengthy legal battles of the weather.

However, this ruling represents a blow to artificial intelligence companies, according to a professor of Cornell University of Digital and Internet Law James Grimmalman: “If this decision is followed elsewhere, this is really bad for the IQ companies.” Grimmelmann believes that BIBAS ruling indicates that many of the judicial precedents referred to by the Improvised IQ companies that indicate that fair use is “unrelated”.

Chris Mamin, a partner in Womble Bond Dickinson, who focuses on the intellectual property law, agrees that this will complicate the arguments of the fair use of artificial intelligence companies, although it may differ from the plaintiff to the plaintiff. “He puts a finger on the scale towards keeping this fair use that does not apply,” he says.