AI lawsuit: half a defeat, half a victory for rights holders

A copyright ruling worth reading...

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria of the Northern District of California has just issued a crucial decision in Kadrey v. Meta, granting partial summary judgment in favor of Meta in a copyright infringement action arising from the use of copyrighted books to train its LLM (LLaMA) models.

Judge Chhabria ruled that the social media giant's use of copyrighted books to train its Llama AI models fell within the scope of "fair use", the main limitation on copyright in Anglo-Saxon law.... but only in this particular case, and only because the plaintiffs failed to structure their theory of harm to the market.

But he says: "This decision does not mean that Meta's use of copyrighted materials to form its language models is legal.... It is based solely on the fact that these plaintiffs presented the wrong arguments and failed to build a dossier of evidence to support their claims. In most cases, the answer will probably be yes (training models with copyrighted works without permission is illegal) unless "fair use" is reliably demonstrated."

Judge Chhabria warns that generative AI poses serious threats to the market for human creativity, and urges the courts to remain vigilant. The ruling highlights a number of areas where claims could be more successful against Meta.

It is therefore a limited victory, not a blanket license for AI companies. The ruling leaves the door open to future claims with better-supported cases on the damages associated with AI substitution of authorship, particularly in the case of productions that compete commercially with original works.

Proof that the future of copyright in the age of artificial intelligence will be played out not only in regulations, but also in litigation, through the ability of authors to defend their rights.

To find out more, read the judgment: Kadrey et al v. Meta Platforms, Inc, No. 3:2023cv03417 - Document 280 (N.D. Cal. 2024)